A gist would be helpful. By the way, which version of Julia are you running?


2014-03-25 16:19 GMT+01:00 James Crist <[email protected]>:

> I'm probably not. New to this language, still figuring things out. The
> matrix type seems to be inferred correctly though. I'll put a gist up in a
> bit to try and get some more relevant feedback.
>
>
> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:54:53 AM UTC-5, Andreas Noack Jensen wrote:
>
>> I don't think you are right about LAPACK. The code tries to promote to a
>> type which is stable under lu factorizing which is the intermediate step in
>> the calculation. The problem could be that your matrix type is not inferred
>> correctly. Please try to let your type by subtype of Number and then define
>> your matrix by
>>
>> a = Mytype[mytype(1) mytype(2); mytype(3) mytype(4)]
>>
>> and see if it works.
>>
>>
>> 2014-03-25 15:29 GMT+01:00 James Crist <[email protected]>:
>>
>> Yeah, I get a "ERROR: no method Triangular{..." error, because my type
>>> doesn't subtype Number. If I do subtype number, then it wants a conversion
>>> function to convert it to a float, so it can use the LAPACK routines.
>>>
>>> -Jim
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:22:29 AM UTC-5, Andreas Noack Jensen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Have you tried to invert it? Maybe it works already. There is a generic
>>>> inv in base/linalg/generic.jl. You'll have to define a one method for you
>>>> type and maybe also a zero method.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-03-25 15:14 GMT+01:00 James Crist <[email protected]>:
>>>>
>>>> I have a type I've defined. It's not a number, but it has all
>>>>> arithmetic operations defined for it. Is there a way to calculate the
>>>>> inverse of a matrix of a user defined type? For example, if I was to 
>>>>> define:
>>>>>
>>>>> a = [mytype(1) mytype(2); mytype(3) mytype(4)]
>>>>> b = inv(a)
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking through base, there doesn't seem to be a way to find inverses
>>>>> of non-numeric matrices (although I may be missing it). For my case, even 
>>>>> a
>>>>> simple algorithm that only works well for small matrices (<10x10) would be
>>>>> more than sufficient. If a way for doing this doesn't currently exist, 
>>>>> I'll
>>>>> probably try to roll my own.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Med venlig hilsen
>>>>
>>>> Andreas Noack Jensen
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Med venlig hilsen
>>
>> Andreas Noack Jensen
>>
>


-- 
Med venlig hilsen

Andreas Noack Jensen

Reply via email to