OK! Something curious was happening:
Toby St Clere Smithe <m...@tsmithe.net> writes: > I wish I could be so sure! Somehow, the contents of the vector get lost > somewhere during the call to the solver function. The vector is correct > immediately before the call in Python, but during the call it seems to > change. Very strange. At least I know where the bug is, though! For most of the PyViennaCL functions, where the prototypes are compatible, I pass vector_base objects to ViennaCL, because that way I don't have to have a large number of identical functions for vector, vector_proxy, etc. In this case, I was passing the vector as a vector_base object to the solver, and for some reason, it became 0 along the way. Does anyone know why that might be? This doesn't seem to happen elsewhere.. (Notably, for instance, the direct solvers work, and those calls use matrix_base and vector_base prototypes). Cheers, Toby ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls. Read the Whitepaper. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121054471&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ ViennaCL-devel mailing list ViennaCL-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/viennacl-devel
