Re: broken coordinate_matrix::sort with gcc 4.7

Hi,

OK, I estimate to have a patch available within the next 10 days.

Cheers,
Jörn

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:ublas-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Gunter Winkler
> Sent: Donnerstag, 13. September 2012 22:52
> To: ublas mailing list
> Subject: Re: [ublas] broken coordinate_matrix::sort with gcc 4.7
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Am Tuesday 11 September 2012 schrieb Ungermann, Jörn:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > we created a simple version of inplace_merge, which can be added as
> > method to coordinate_matrix. It is not intensely tested, something we
> > would do via Testcases in case we proceed in this direction (I do not
> > fully trust my lower_bound for all border cases; it also seems to use
> > to man LoC). However, using this in our numerical code, all of our
> > application testcases pass.
> >
> >       array_size_type lower_bound(array_size_type beg,
> array_size_type
> > end, array_size_type target) const {
> >         while (end > beg + 1) {
> > ....
> >         inplace_merge(new_mid, rig_mid, end);
> >       }
> >
> > And the std::inplace_merge call in sort needs to be replaced by
> >
> > inplace_merge(0, sorted_filled_, filled_);
> >
> > Similar code would be needed for the sparse vector. If desired, I can
> > provide patches and associated testcases. The performance of this is
> > indistinguishable from the STL internal buffer-less algorithm.
> >
> 
> I'd vote for this solution because we know for sure that the
> index_triple_iterator cannot be used with a temporary buffer. Thus
> using a custom inplace_merge relying on working std algotrithms seems
> to be a robust solution.
> 
> Please attach patches to https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/ticket/7363
> so we can track the related changes.
> 
> mfg
> Gunter
> 
> 
> 
>

_______________________________________________
ublas mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ublas
Sent to: [email protected]