Re: [ublas] Is uBLAS like the rest of Boost? Should it be?

Subject: Re: [ublas] Is uBLAS like the rest of Boost? Should it be?
From: Riccardo Rossi (rrossi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-26 02:44:08

Dear Paul,
 "no matrices of matrices" is a final decision? 

For modern processor (sparse) "block" matrices would be far more
efficient so ... is there any hope such constraint will be relaxed in a
future?

greetings
Riccardo

-  
________________________________________________________________
Riccardo Rossi, Ph.D, Civil Engineer
member of the Kratos Group: kratos.cimne.upc.es
Centro Internacional de Métodos Numéricos en Ingeniería (CIMNE)
Universidad Politécnica de Cataluña (UPC)
Edificio C-1, campus Norte UPC
Gran Capitan, s/n
08034 Barcelona, España
Tel. [phone]
________________________________________________________________

AVISO IMPORTANTE

Los datos de carácter personal contenidos en el mensaje, se registrarán
en un fichero para facilitar la gestión de las comunicaciones de CIMNE.
Se pueden ejercitar los derechos de acceso, rectificación, cancelación y
oposición por escrito, dirigiéndose a nuestras oficinas de CIMNE, Gran
Capitán s/n,  Edificio C1 - Campus Norte UPC, 08034 Barcelona, España.

AVÍS IMPORTANT

Les dades de carà cter personal contingudes en aquest missatge es
registraran en un fitxer per facilitar la gestió de les comunicacions
del CIMNE. Es poden exercir els drets d'accés, rectificació,
cancel·lació i oposició, per escrit a les nostres oficines del CIMNE,
Gran Capità s/n, Edifici C1, Campus Nord UPC, 08034 Barcelona, Espanya.

IMPORTANT NOTICE

All personal data contained in this mail will be processed
confidentially and stored in a file property of CIMNE in order to manage
corporate communications. You may exercise the right of access,
rectification, deletion and objection by letter sent to CIMNE, Gran
Capitán, Edificio C1 - Campus Norte UPC, 08034 Barcelona, Spain.

On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 13:18 +1100, Paul C. Leopardi wrote:
> >From the thread:
> Re: [ublas] Why is there no constructor taking an initial value?
> 
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2009, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> ...
> > It's one of boost's hallmarks, that we try to make as much as possible
> > similar to the STL. It's much easier to learn new libraries that way.
> ...
> 
> Hi all,
> This brings up an important point, to my mind. 
> 
> uBLAS went through 3 phases, to oversimplify:
> (1) Initial design and construction
> (2) "Boostification" and acceptance into Boost
> (3) Maturity
> 
> So uBLAS is what it is because it was what it was in phase (1). Its strength 
> is its consistency with its own design principles. That does mean, though, 
> that it is not all things to all people, eg:
> o No matrices of matrices; no matrices over non-commutative rings;
> o No multiplication operators;
> o No simple way to fill on initialization; etc.
> 
> So, what was the effect of phase (2)? How much is uBLAS like the rest of 
> Boost? Should it be more like the rest of Boost? What would need to be done? 
> Is it too late for a phase (4)? Or would making uBLAS more like the rest of 
> Boost be too inconsistent with phase (1)?
> Thanks, Paul
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ublas mailing list
> ublas_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ublas