Re: [boost] different matrix library?

Subject: Re: [boost] different matrix library?
From: DE (satan66613_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-21 11:22:57

i got a thought

remember my discussion about hierarchy of expression types
in general a more specific expression derives from general expression:

    template<typename type>
    class specific_expression : public expression<type> {};

suppose you don't want to abandon policy drived creation of objects
like 'object<some_type, specific>'
then to provide behavior such that operations on specific objects
handle them specifically (yielding specific result) we can provide
that policies drive also the type of expression an object belongs to

    struct default_policy
    {
      template<typename type>
      struct expr { typedef expression<type> type; };
    };

    struct specific  //specific policy
    {
      template<typename type>
      struct expr { typedef specific_expression<type> type; };
    };

    template<typename some_type, typename policy = default_policy>
    class object :
      public typename policy::expr<object<some_type, policy> >::type
    {               //^^CRTP here
      //interface
    };

then we can write

    object<t> o1, o2, o3;
    o3 = some_op(o1, o2);  //using general (not specialized) version
    //...
    object<t, specific> s1, s2, s3;
    s3 = some_op(s1, s2);  //using specialized version
    //...
    o3 = some_op(o1, s2);  //using general version
    s3 = some_op(s1, o2);  //error: can not assign result (general
                           //one) to specific object
                           //(or can - design decision)

this is also trivially extended by the (naive) user:

   class myobject : public specific_expression<myobject> {/*...*/};
   //...
   myobject m;
   s3 = some_op(m, s2);  //still using specialized version

although it compiles with msvc80 i don't know if it is portable in
general (there could be an issue deriving from dependent type)
   
to joel:
#1: all of this, i suppose, can be easily implemented within
your policy system (if not yet)

#2: do you use CRTP for policies itself? to restrict usages like this:

    matrix<double, settings( symmetric, 42 ) > m;

i think it's a good idea, then settings() becomes something like

    template<typename p1, typename p2>
    <resulting_policy_type> settings(policy<p1>, policy<p2>);

-- 
Pavel