On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Joel Falcou <joel.falcou@u-psud.fr> wrote:
Kornel Kisielewicz a écrit :
And to add something more merithorical to the discussion: I see a need, and I see a place in boost for a library that provides: a) an fixed-sized matrix<dim,dim,traits> class, that works for any dimension but is also hand-optimized for dimensions <= 4, b) an fixed-sized vector?<dim,traits> class that works for any dimension but is also hand-optimized for dimensions <= 4, *
Just being picky here. I don't like when matrix/vector libraries specify two types for both matrix and vector cause it becomes hard or unreadable to differentiate vector which are 1xN from vector begin Nx1. A global matrix<Type,Dim1,Dim2 = 1,...DimN=1> is , IMHO, better as you can compile-time check that your matrix/vector outer dimensions matches for operator like gemm.
Agreed. That's a much nicer solution. Hence, the whole library could be named matrix, and we wouldn't have problems with naming the vectors. -- regards, Kornel Kisielewicz