Boost logo

Boost :

From: Michael Stevens (Michael.Stevens_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-07-05 11:47:41

Oppps I forgot the last section of David's posting.

On Saturday 03 July 2004 16:54,David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
> > Other then the many forms of blocking (other then banded) uBLAS supports
> > these in its design.
> I believe that a design with really good support for blocking can't be
> easily grafted onto an existing design that doesn't have it.
Now I understand. Blocking in the context of evaluation rather then sparsity/
Yes this is a good point. Blocking evaluation requires significant
contribution from the Expression Template mechanism that is not present in

> > Other then the lack of ET in the current MTL the big difference
> > between the two libraries is the definition of iterators. Neither
> > design seems to be perfect with regard to efficiency.
> No, and I have some ideas for addressing that.
A improved iterator concept that allows succinct coding and runtime efficiency
would be a big step forward.

> > Since uBLAS is already in Boost and has a well established and clean user
> > syntax it would seem strange to ignore it.
> Yeah, I stopped ignoring it long enough to determine for sure that we
> should probably ignore it :(.
No sure what to say here!
> > For the perspective of building further Linear Algebra algorithms it
> > would not be too hard to use the syntax sufficiently portably so
> > that a future MTL with expression templates could not be used
> > interchangeably.
> We have some problems with the syntax too, as you can see from the
> above.  That said, if the design of MTL makes sparing use of members
> and instead relies on free functions, you should be able to make
> uBlas syntax adapters ;-)
Can't fault the logic here :-)

All the best,

Michael Stevens Systems Engineering
Navigation Systems, Estimation  and
                 Bayesian Filtering

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