I take it no objections then. On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <[email protected]> wrote:
> I guess i still very much want to rename iterator() in sparse matrix to > something like iterateNonEmpty(). That would fix it everywhere. Thoughts? > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> ok so >> >> for (row <- mxA.iterateAll) >> >> works correctly even for SparseMatrix. Now i _only_ have to fix all the >> spots where it says without iterateAll. which is like every where. must be >> fun. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:31 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Or that is meant to be behavior of iterateAll() only? which is true for >>> all iterators except SparseMatrix it seems. >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 5:22 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I posted a question before about what it means to iterate over matrix, >>>> and was given an answer it means going over matrix rows (0...m-1). >>>> >>>> That makes it, for exapmle, possible to create code like the following >>>> >>>> for ( (row, index) <- mxA.zipWithIndex ) row += something(index) >>>> >>>> however actual code in SparseMatrix iterates over hash of existing >>>> rows. That breaks this execution for SparseMatrix only in two senses : >>>> >>>> (1) not all rows are visited; only those that have non-zeros. In >>>> particular, if we created a matrix via like() then nothing is happening at >>>> all; >>>> >>>> (2) rows are not visited in order of indices. >>>> >>>> I would like to fix (1) and (2) problems in this iterator but not sure >>>> if this is important elsewhere. >>>> >>> >>> >> >
