Boost logo

Boost :

From: Ronald Garcia (garcia_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-10-29 18:02:44

Joerg Walter wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ronald Garcia" <garcia_at_[hidden]>
>To: "Boost mailing list" <boost_at_[hidden]>
>Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 5:26 AM
>Subject: Re: [boost] Re: multi_array resize?
>>It turns out that muti_array DOES have a resize operation. It is
>>described in the reference documentation, and unfortunately, the user
>>documentation has been in dire need of a rewrite for some time now.
>>This work is partly done, but is currently on hold (my apologies).
>>I hope to return to that endeavor shortly.
>I've recently started to write ublas adaptors for multi_array and its views.
>A couple of observations/questions:
>- it probably would be a bit easier to adapt multi_array if it would be
>default constructible
Yes. As it happens, I added support for a default-constructible
multi_array at the same time as I added the resize operation. Resizing
and default construction seemed tied together.

>- I don't like the necessity very much to 'typedef' multi_array's range
>- how does one distinguish multi_arrays from multi_array_views generically?
Currently there is no mechanism for doing so. When is this
functionality useful?

>And one from Kresimir Fresl:
>- how does one distinguish C storage and Fortran storage layout generically?
Since the storage layout is not part of an array's type, you cannot
distinguish the two generically (assuming that by generically you mean
"at compile time"). The multi_array has a storage_order member function
that returns the storage order object. This can be used at runtime to
determine the storage order of an array, though it is expressed in a
more general form than C or Fortran storage order.

Hope this helps,


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at