From: David Bellot (david.bellot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-06-12 23:01:56
> I think push_back does only make sense for vectors. I would prefer a
> free fuction such as 'cat' that can operate also on tensors.
Being also an R programmer, I like the functional approach with free
functions. It also makes sense from a template point of view.
It's indeed a 'cat' or 'c' we need. In R for example, you also have rbind
and cbind for adding rows or columns to matrices/data.frame and 'c' for
anything which looks like a vector. It's very convenient to use.
For a ublas::vector, it seems pretty obvious. For a matrix? Or a tensor?
>> If I decide to represent all the vectors as matrices now, they become row
>> and column vectors then.
>> Should I expect the same effect on doing a push_back to a row vector and
>> a column vector?
>> In general, could we make ublas STL compatible in general (means
>> vector/matrix/tensor are STL compatible)?
>> Does my question even make sense?
> Makes totally sense. I have already sth prepared. We can do it very
Awesome. Could you create a branch in the git and push your code on that
branch so that we can start playing with it/