Anders Logg wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 01:34:24PM +0200, Martin Sandve Alnæs wrote: >> 2008/4/11, Anders Logg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 12:23:15PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > Anders Logg wrote: >>> > > Which one do we want to use for element access in vectors and >>> > > matrices. It looks like operator() is now implemented for uBlasVector, >>> > > but isn't operator[] more natural to use? >>> > > >>> > >>> > Much the same to me. We've used (.,.) for matrices, so it seems natural >>> > to use (.) for vectors. >>> > >>> > Garth >>> >>> >>> We could use [] for matrices also I guess. >>> >>> Then it will look the same as numpy. >> It's useful to index vectors with [], since the code will be similar >> for regular arrays. > > I forgot something important, namely that operator[] expects exactly > one argument, so we can't do A[i, j] for matrices. > > Maybe then it's better to have () both for vectors and matrices? >
Whatever you do with matrices, I don't have an opinion. However, I think operator[] should be present for vectors. One can argue that it does not _need_ to be there, but the fact is that it _is_ in the 0.7.2 interface (it worked until yesterday for uBlasVector, but it was maybe handled by uBlas itself?). /Dag _______________________________________________ DOLFIN-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
