Perhaps I'm missing something, buy why expose glp_create_index at all?
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 7:48 AM, Andrew Makhorin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > please, update the documentation to clearly point out that an error is > > thrown in glp_find_col > > and glp_find row if not preceded by a call to glp_create_index. > > Okay, I will add a paragraph to clarify the issue. > > > > > Wouldn't it be a good idea to let these functions implicitly call > > glp_create_index, if the > > index is missing? > > I don't think so. It would be a sort of obscure feature, when the > program does something that it shouldn't do (if the feature is > disabled), and the user doesn't know about that. > > > > > The documentation leaves it unmentioned that the index is updated when > > a new column or row > > is added after calling glp_create_index. > > On adding/removing named rows/columns the index is updated (if exists). > > > > > Why is the index not always created when creating a new problem? The > > overhead of the index seems to be negligible. > > This feature is optional, because in most cases the name index is not > needed. If necessary, the user may easily enable this feature by a call > to glp_create_index immediately after glp_create_prob. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Help-glpk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-glpk >
_______________________________________________ Help-glpk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-glpk
