On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Gokhan Capan <gkhn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> - I strongly suspect that you don't need to implement VectorSuperView. >> Won't the normal handling of viewRow in AbstractMatrix work here? Speed >> may be an issue, but all speed questions should be decided by measurements. >> > It was because the iterateNonZero didn't work, and this was intended to > work on mostly sparse matrices. I think (but I'm not sure yet) making this > ConcatenatedMatrix a direct subclass of SparseRowMatrix would solve this > problem, that may be an option. (I personally needed this multi-vectors > anyway, so I implemented it) > This is an interesting option (sub-classing from SRM). Having the multi-vectors is nice as you say. My only point was that they weren't necessarily implied by the need for row views. I am not sure which would be faster in the end.
