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 just forked this repository.. It has a lot of potential. Are you thinking of explicitly storing zero elements through the the [] operator? Or would setting values through the []operator only be stored at nz locations after checking row/column indices?
Thanks in advance,
Steena
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I would like to have the operator[] for both setting and getting values (as stated in the Readme file).
The internal functionality would be the same as in the get() and set() methods. Is there any reason for storing zero values explicitely?
The only difference I see there is is that the getter operator[] will need some meta-structure for matrix row which will also have T operator[] getter.
Hi there,
I just forked this repository.. It has a lot of potential. Are you thinking of explicitly storing zero elements through the the [] operator? Or would setting values through the []operator only be stored at
nz
locations after checking row/column indices?Thanks in advance,
Steena
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: