Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] : different matrix library?
From: Maurizio Vitale (maurizio.vitale_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-27 11:54:12


>>>>> "DE" == DE <satan66613_at_[hidden]> writes:

    DE> on 26.08.2009 at 20:38 joel wrote :
>>> a thought about operations tweaks
>>>
>>> one may want to tile and/or partially unroll operation loops but
>>> since such thing characterize operations rather than objects
>>> themselves it is wrong to tag the objects with such info
>>> consider
>>>
>>> matrix<double, tile<3, 3> > tiled1; //the first one //...
>>> matrix<double, tile<3, 1> > tiled2; //far from the first one
>>> //... matrix<double> result = tiled1*tiled2; //what tiling
>>> would occure
>> In those cases, we compute the smallest common multiple of tiling
>> shape as stated in all loop optimization techniques paper.
    DE> i consider it a bad (erroneos) practice because in such a case
    DE> neither of programmers intentions would take place but something
    DE> totally different instead

    DE> '3' is a common number as well as 'power of 2' in such a common
    DE> case like

Seems like you're determined to keep this thread alive beyond
reason. May I humbly suggest that at least you do the following before
posting:

        - read the text you're answering to

        - make yourself familiar with the relevant literature

Had you done so, you would, maybe, discovered that:

        - a common multiple is not a common number, although they have
          common in common.

        - more, a common multiple of a tiling shape is not even a number
          (although it can represented by one in R^n).

        - last, that people have written about this profusely and
          googling for a few keywords would be a good idea.

Other than that, yes, 3 is a rather common number. Not as nice as my
personal favourite, 42, though.
Best regards,

  Maurizio


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk