Subject: Re: [ublas] [bindings] New traits system
From: Rutger ter Borg (rutger_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-20 03:47:34
Thomas Klimpel wrote:
> I agree that the assertion seems to be correct. What is strange is that
> "bindings::size_column(a)" return 4, also "a" is constructed as
> size_t n = 3;
> m4x4_t a (n, n);
> so I would expect "bindings::size_column(a)" to return 3. I noticed
> typedef ublas::c_matrix<double, 4, 4> m4x4_t;
> but I couldn't find any mention of ublas::c_matrix in the new traits
> system. The old traits system had an explicit binding for ublas::c_matrix.
I've fixed the ordering stuff, too. By now, I'm more and more convinced the
bindings are correct, and the segfault is caused by a wrong test. I'm no
math guru, but shouldn't "b" be Nx1 instead of 1XN?