Re: [ublas] A few patches for bugs and a feature

Subject: Re: [ublas] A few patches for bugs and a feature
From: David Bellot (david.bellot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-07-16 02:58:30

Hi Jesse,

thanks for the patches. I will take care of them as soon as possible. I'm
especially glad with the operator*.
Well, I'm glad with bugs with MSVC because I don't use windows at all so I
couldn't find those.
It's too late for 1.44 for they will be in 1.45 for sure for it has been
closed for all changes last monday.

Cheers,
David

On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 01:15, Jesse Perla <jesseperla_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I realize it may be too late for 1.44 (though I hope not).  But I have
> a couple of patches that I have had to apply the last few versions.  A
> few are for bugs, and a few are for features.  I added a ticket to
> trac but wanted to make sure that I did it right.  All of them have
> patches that I just built from the trunk.
>
> 1)  MSVC doesn't work with bounded_vector's of size 0:
> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4440
> The problem is when you allocate statically allocated vectors of size
> 0, MSVC throws a fit.
>
> 2) SFINAE added for operator * breaks auto-differentiation library:
> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4441
> When operator * overloading was discussed, some overload resolution
> code was added.  But the metafunction used is unncessarily strong for
> the requirements on the type and breaks an AD library I use.
>
> 3) Simple operator * for matrix products.
> https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4442
> This has been discussed many times, but I have attached a very simple
> implementation of this that works for non-nested products, and
> statically tests if the products are nested to prevent compilation.
> It seems that this code is unlikely to cause any regressions, so I
> wonder if we should just bite the bullet and get a simple
> implementation in there for now.
>
> 4) Bounded vector constructor missing explicit and an initialization
> version: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/4443
> There is an ugly bug in the bounded vector constructors and a simple
> missing feature to make it consistent with other vector types.
>
> I don't think that any of these (except perhaps the MSVC patch along
> with boost::serialization?) are high risk, and if it is possible to
> merge in this or the next release that would be awesome.  Please tell
> me if I have created the patch incorrectly, etc.
>
> -Jesse
> _______________________________________________
> ublas mailing list
> ublas_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ublas
> Sent to: david.bellot_at_[hidden]
>

-- 
David Bellot, PhD
david.bellot_at_[hidden]
http://david.bellot.free.fr