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
I'm having a hard time trying to understand a weird behavior when using some custom Indexbase with my containers. To illustrate that, lets suppose I define two types of GeMatrix: a
GEMatrix6 with IndexBase 6, and a GEMatrix1 with IndexBase 1. Suppose I create
2 matrices of each type: GEMatrix6 A, and GEMatrix1 B. What is bothering me is
that if I do the following:
GEMatrix1 B = A;
the matrix B assumes the IndexBase of A (6), despite being of type GEMatrix1
(with IndexBase 1). The same goes if I do the following:
GEMatrix1 B;
B = A;
By contrast, if I do the following:
GEMatrix1 B(A.numRows(), A.numCols());
B = A;
then the matrix B assumes the IndexType of its type (1), as I expected in the
first place for all cases. Is this different behavior normal?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi Michael,
I'm having a hard time trying to understand a weird behavior when using some custom Indexbase with my containers. To illustrate that, lets suppose I define two types of GeMatrix: a
GEMatrix6 with IndexBase 6, and a GEMatrix1 with IndexBase 1. Suppose I create
2 matrices of each type: GEMatrix6 A, and GEMatrix1 B. What is bothering me is
that if I do the following:
GEMatrix1 B = A;
the matrix B assumes the IndexBase of A (6), despite being of type GEMatrix1
(with IndexBase 1). The same goes if I do the following:
GEMatrix1 B;
B = A;
By contrast, if I do the following:
GEMatrix1 B(A.numRows(), A.numCols());
B = A;
then the matrix B assumes the IndexType of its type (1), as I expected in the
first place for all cases. Is this different behavior normal?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: