Okay. I missed that definition for AbstractArray. Thanks for the
clarification.
2014-12-08 9:51 GMT-05:00 Ivar Nesje <iva...@gmail.com>:
> I don't think
>
> elsize{T}(::AbstractArray{T}) = sizeof(T)
>
> provides much in the sense of protection, but the *convert(Ptr{T}, x)* will
> probably filter out AbstractArrays that isn't backed by a pointer. SubArray
> implements its own pointer method, so we will probably get a MethodError
> when we expect it.
>
> Ivar
>
> kl. 15:04:59 UTC+1 mandag 8. desember 2014 skrev Andreas Noack følgende:
>>
>> Ivar, I like that idea. It would make it easier to use pointers for
>> arrays. Maybe there are caveats I haven't seen.
>>
>> Regarding AbstractArray, I think the call to elsize serves as a
>> correctness check for that method.
>>
>> 2014-12-07 17:31 GMT-05:00 Ivar Nesje <iva...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Seems to me like pointer(A, 3, 6) would be nice and unambiguous for 2d
>>> arrays. Is there any reason why that shouldn't be implemented?
>>>
>>> The current implementation is a little too dangerous for AbstractArray,
>>> in my opinion. Can we limit it to ContiguousArray (or whatever it is called
>>> now), and make it somewhat safer?
>>>
>>> https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/4b299c2fd5464ece308a8e708789a9
>>> d2aa9e32d3/base/pointer.jl#L29
>>>
>>> I know these questions is a better fit for github, but I don't have time
>>> to create a PR right now.
>>
>>
>>
