2013/10/17 Philippe Tillet
> Hey hey,
>
> Well, the main problem I have with incorporating implicit_vector_base
> inside vector_base is that this sounds like replacing inheritance with
> switches on enum :P
> However, I think I have found a solution which will satisfy both of us:
>
> viennacl::ve
Hey hey,
Well, the main problem I have with incorporating implicit_vector_base
inside vector_base is that this sounds like replacing inheritance with
switches on enum :P
However, I think I have found a solution which will satisfy both of us:
viennacl::vector_base<> already have this constructor:
Hey,
> After thinking more about it, I see a conceptual flaw in that approach,
> since implicit_vector cannot be used as l-value, while vector_base<>
> can, it would lead to very misleading code, where implicit_vectors would
> have (empty, or throwing exceptions) operator overloads... The risk he
Hi again,
After thinking more about it, I see a conceptual flaw in that approach,
since implicit_vector cannot be used as l-value, while vector_base<> can,
it would lead to very misleading code, where implicit_vectors would have
(empty, or throwing exceptions) operator overloads... The risk here i
Hi
2013/10/16 Karl Rupp
> Hi,
>
>
> Rather than introducing yet another base class, what about allowing
>> implicit vectors in vector_base<> by suitable constructor arguments?
>> This will also keep compilation times under control :-)
>>
>>
>> I'm a bit confused, this solution woul
Hi,
> Rather than introducing yet another base class, what about allowing
> implicit vectors in vector_base<> by suitable constructor arguments?
> This will also keep compilation times under control :-)
>
>
> I'm a bit confused, this solution would then allocate memory in the case
> of
Hi hi,
2013/10/16 Karl Rupp
> Hi,
>
> > It seems like the behavior of scalar_vector, unit_vector etc has changed
> > a bit since the appearance of the kernel generator.
> > I am currently extending the API of the generator, with relational
> > operators. I want to design a specific kernel whic
Hi,
> It seems like the behavior of scalar_vector, unit_vector etc has changed
> a bit since the appearance of the kernel generator.
> I am currently extending the API of the generator, with relational
> operators. I want to design a specific kernel which checks for X[i] <
> 0.42, for all i.
> Si
Hi,
It seems like the behavior of scalar_vector, unit_vector etc has changed a
bit since the appearance of the kernel generator.
I am currently extending the API of the generator, with relational
operators. I want to design a specific kernel which checks for X[i] < 0.42,
for all i.
Since operator<
