From: Andreas Klöckner (kloeckner_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-21 05:36:02
Karl Meerbergen schrieb:
> Perhaps, we should not allow to bind a compressed_matrix that is not fully
> built up. For Direct solvers codes, this makes sense, because if there is a
> row or column without elements, the matrix is singular.
True. On the other hand, UMFPACK deals with singular matrices to some
extent. Also, an all-zero column or row is (in theory) no problem for an
eigensolver. I don't think we should preclude the use of this type of
> In this situation, we only assert on the completeness of the matrix, rather
> than modifying it.
I agree that modifying a const parameter is problematic. We might make
the completion method non-const and require the user to call it before
using bindings code. Then the bindings code could just assert
completeness, as you suggest. I will submit an updated patch.