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

        - 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,


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