Re: [ublas] zero_vector broken?

From: Sebastian Gesemann (s.gesemann_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-12-10 10:48:29

On Dec 10, 2007 4:37 PM, Neal Becker <ndbecker2_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I understand that it doesn't store the zeros - that's why I used it.  I
> thought it was supposed to act _as if_ it had stored the zeros.
>

Appearently, not. Iterators seem to be _storage oriented_. Otherwise the
concept of an indexed iterator wouldn't make much sense -- Also, you'd have
a problem with dereferencing nonexisting data ;)

Indexed iterators are an advantage because they allow us to exploit any
sparseness.

If you don't want that it should be possible to build a "const dense
iterator proxy" that behaves the way you want it to.

Cheers!
SG