Also, the general view is that new sparse matrix formats should be in packages rather than Base, which everyone agrees with. This would lead to faster development - and Base can be modified to make it easy to add new sparse formats.
-viral On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 9:30:31 AM UTC+5:30, Viral Shah wrote: > > Nobody is working on it at the moment, that I know of. We almost had a > working version then, but it was deemed too complex to include in Base at > that time. > > -viral > > On Wednesday, March 9, 2016 at 6:28:26 AM UTC+5:30, Anonymous wrote: >> >> Thank you for the response, I read the 2015 discussion on here about CSR >> sparse matrices, do you happen to know the implementation status on when >> this will be included? >> >> On Monday, March 7, 2016 at 4:59:40 PM UTC-8, Tim Holy wrote: >>> >>> Likely yes to both. Best to just test yourself, of course. >>> >>> I'm sure you know this, but you'll want to access them through the >>> return >>> values of findnz or equivalent, not using S[i,j]. >>> >>> --Tim >>> >>> On Monday, March 07, 2016 10:50:58 AM Anonymous wrote: >>> > So I have a sparse matrix which doesn't get modified by for which I >>> would >>> > like to access by rows, is there significantly more overhead in >>> accessing >>> > rows vs columns? If so, would it be more efficient to instead access >>> the >>> > columns of its transpose? >>> >>>
