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
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 3, 2020. It is now read-only.
std::array is quite limited, in terms of size. On my machine (relative high end XPS), anything beyond a 500x500 matrix causes a seg fault. I think this is because we went beyond what is allowed on the stack. Can we split it up? Can we do something smart? Or shall we resort to a raw memory? (vectors are bad, we are already wrapping them so we can provide some safety)
Suggested Solution
One SS could be to split this up into matrix and tiny_matrix. tiny_matrix will continue to use std::array<T,N>'s and matrix would use T*. Note that we can use std array instead of C-style array because std::array is identical in performance and nicer to use. So use it.
Acceptance Criteria.
Careful well-reasoned/justified implementation
testing
benchmarking
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Problem
std::array
is quite limited, in terms of size. On my machine (relative high end XPS), anything beyond a 500x500 matrix causes a seg fault. I think this is because we went beyond what is allowed on the stack. Can we split it up? Can we do something smart? Or shall we resort to a raw memory? (vectors are bad, we are already wrapping them so we can provide some safety)Suggested Solution
One SS could be to split this up into
matrix
andtiny_matrix
.tiny_matrix
will continue to usestd::array<T,N>
's andmatrix
would useT*
. Note that we can use std array instead of C-style array because std::array is identical in performance and nicer to use. So use it.Acceptance Criteria.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: