On 29 April 2013 14:50, Ed Meyer <eem2...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not proposing using anything but octave_idx_type for indexing or > changing the return type of numel() - I just question why numel() is > used for sparse matrices. It should be irrelevant for anything but > ccs2full().
The numel function is just one example where this sparse matrix with big dimensions broke. Sparse matrices this large can still break in other ways. Furthermore, what do you propose to do if numel is called for sparse matrices, despite your suggestion to not call it for sparse matrices? A lot of code out there already assumes that you can treat a sparse matrix like any other matrix. I don't think numel is to blame. Another way I can think of would be that A(idx) would also break if idx is greater than the maximum index size. We would have to introduce special rules to handle that for sparse matrices of large dimensions. The problem isn't the storage size, it's the index size, which is why for other matrices Octave's error message says out of memory or index too big. I really don't see a way around this other than introducing a special index type for sparse matrices, and I don't see this as hugely useful. It also looks like a lot of boring work. But if you insist on doing this, don't let me discourage you. If you can figure out a consistent behaviour that doesn't break current code, you write the patch, and all tests pass, I'll happily apply it. - Jordi G. H. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
