In these cases I do the following:
(1) Add additional type parameters, as in
```Julia
type FooImp{D,D1}
baz::Array{D}
bar::Array{D1}
end
```
(2) Add a function that calculates the type:
```Julia
Foo(D) = FooImpl{D,D+1}
```
In many cases I can then have to write `Foo(D)` instead of `Foo{D}` (round
parentheses instead of curly braces), but apart from this, things work out
nicely. I'm sure there is some `@pure` annotation or similar for `Foo` to
help type inference.
-erik
PS: Yes, it would be nice if this calculation (`D1 = D+1`) could be moved
elsewhere, e.g. into the type definition. I don't see why this isn't
possible, I think it's mostly a complicated thing to implement, and people
haven't demonstrated the necessity for this yet.
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:07 AM, Robert DJ <math.rob...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem with not specifying D is type inference. I actually have more
> entries in Foo and would like
>
> type Foo{D}
> baz::Array{D}
> bar::Array{D+1}
> end
>
>
> I want to use Foo in calculations and for D = 1 I am doing something like
>
> baz + bar[:,1]
> baz + bar[:,2]
>
>
> For D = 2:
>
> baz + bar[:,:,1]
> baz + bar[:,:,2]
>
>
> I *could* instead (for D = 2) move the third dimension to extra columns...
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 8:56:28 PM UTC+2, Robert DJ wrote:
>>
>> I have a custom type with a TypePar denoting a dimension and would like
>> to define the following:
>>
>> type Foo{D}
>> bar::Array{D+1}
>> end
>>
>> However, this does not work. As D is only 1 or 2 it would OK with
>>
>> type Foo{1}
>> bar::Matrix
>> end
>>
>> type Foo{2}
>> bar::Array{3}
>> end
>>
>> but unfortunately this isn't working, either.
>>
>> Can this problem be solved?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>
--
Erik Schnetter <schnet...@gmail.com>
http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/personal/eschnetter/
