You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When using FORTRAN libraries matrices are expected in column-major order instead of row-major.
Span2D<T> and related types use row-major (matches T[,] and also C/C++ conventions)
To use the column-major API one has to create the transposed matrix with Span2D<T>. I find it error-prone.
So I wonder if there is demand for a wrapper type?
It would work as follows: One would wrap around the transposed Span2D<T> and expose almost the same interface but flip column and row arguments when delegating.
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
When using FORTRAN libraries matrices are expected in column-major order instead of row-major.
Span2D<T>
and related types use row-major (matchesT[,]
and also C/C++ conventions)To use the column-major API one has to create the transposed matrix with
Span2D<T>
. I find it error-prone.So I wonder if there is demand for a wrapper type?
It would work as follows: One would wrap around the transposed
Span2D<T>
and expose almost the same interface but flip column and row arguments when delegating.Or are there any problems I haven’t foreseen?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions