Re: [boost] [uBLAS] array_adaptor, shallow_array_adaptor, interoperability and bugs

Subject: Re: [boost] [uBLAS] array_adaptor, shallow_array_adaptor, interoperability and bugs
From: Thomas Klimpel (Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-02-26 06:26:07

Guillermo Ruiz Troyano wrote:
> It is my first post. I still write worst in English than in C++. I hope don't mess it up…

There is a special mailing list for ublas, see
<http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ublas>

> I'm been trying to use array_adaptor and shallow_array_adaptor to modify data with uBLAS.
> Yes, both classes are undocumented but it is useful (not this implementation)
> in some cases to have this kind of adaptor.

I regularly use "shallow_array_adaptor", especially I also have the "#define BOOST_UBLAS_SHALLOW_ARRAY_ADAPTOR" in my code. I haven't thought about whether there would be a way to fix the potential issues.

> WHY NOT?
>
> 1. An unbounded_array and bounded_array constructor for C plain arrays and copy semantics.
> 2. To discontinue this adaptor_array (with a #ifndef) or modify. Its behavior can do it point nº1.
> 3. To fix, test and document shallow_array_adaptor (or another name). It should be useful.
>
> Yes, I know about memory leaks. But there are things like vector proxies,
> iterator ranges, etc. The problem comes when you have not a clear semantic.

Sorry, I haven't tried to follow your description and reasoning in detail. I suggest you repost this to the ublas mailing list, then we can see who "will" take the time to think through this (and eventually work on patches).

Regards,
Thomas