Le 24/08/2011 00:59, Greg Sterijevski a écrit :
Should I open a ticket, or do you want to handle this?
Please open a ticket.
For the moment, I am busy in other parts (integration, geometry and ODE)
and don't fiddle with linear algebra.
Luc
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Luc Maisonobewro
Should I open a ticket, or do you want to handle this?
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 24/08/2011 00:44, Greg Sterijevski a écrit :
>
> I understand you want to support the general case, but why should it
>> necessitate instantiating a ref.
>>
>
> You are right, we cou
Le 24/08/2011 00:44, Greg Sterijevski a écrit :
I understand you want to support the general case, but why should it
necessitate instantiating a ref.
You are right, we could go with an array allocated only upon request.
Luc
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Luc Maisonobewrote:
Le 23/08/201
I understand you want to support the general case, but why should it
necessitate instantiating a ref.
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
> Le 23/08/2011 20:45, Greg Sterijevski a écrit :
>
> Hello All,
>>
>> Since math gives eigendecomposition for symmetrics, why even allocate
Le 23/08/2011 20:45, Greg Sterijevski a écrit :
Hello All,
Since math gives eigendecomposition for symmetrics, why even allocate the
array imagEigenvalues ?
What am I missing?
For now, we are limited to symmetric matrices because we did not
implement anything else. However, we did prepare the
Ted Dunning wrote:
> Numerical issues should not impinge on a computation this small.
>
> For reference, I replicated your computation and found reasonable
> eigenvalues and vectors:
>
>> m = matrix(c(0,1,-1,1,1,0,-1,0,1), nrow=3)
>> m
> [,1] [,2] [,3]
> [1,]01 -1
> [2,]11
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> Numerical issues should not impinge on a computation this small.
...
> Your usage appears to be in accord with the suggested usage, but have you
> tried it with a tolerance of, say, 1e-3?
This gives the same result: {(NaN); (NaN); (NaN)}
--
Ax
Numerical issues should not impinge on a computation this small.
For reference, I replicated your computation and found reasonable
eigenvalues and vectors:
> m = matrix(c(0,1,-1,1,1,0,-1,0,1), nrow=3)
> m
[,1] [,2] [,3]
[1,]01 -1
[2,]110
[3,] -101
> eig(m)
Err
