Hi Nicolas, > I dont think that providing overloading of > Double_t& operator[](Int_t i) > and > Double_t operator[](Int_t i) const yes, you are right. I have misunderstand you. I thought that you want pointer to array. But functions above do not violate encapsulation. There could be some complications for sparced matricies, number of words is less than N*M , but it is solvable. Victor Nicolas Produit wrote: > > Hi Victor, > > > to provide such method you will broke encapsulation. Your code > > must not be dependent of matrix implementation inside a class. > > Let say, TMatrix will be improved and sparce matrices will be > > added. > > Then your method becomes unavailable, what leads to vialation > > of encapsulation. > > I dont think that providing overloading of > Double_t& operator[](Int_t i) > and > Double_t operator[](Int_t i) const > > on TMatrix to fetch or store a value in a 2 D matrix > at place (i/fCols,i%fCols) > would break encapsulation. > > I agree that method GetfElement is, it is why I prefer []. > > For Eddy, > > thanks a lot for the suggestion. But I think your suggestion > is actually a fancy way of doing a copy to TArray, I would rather > have a solution not involving copying. > Anyway I can perhaps use your trick in some case. > > -- > Nicolas Produit > INTEGRAL Science Data Center Phone: +41 22 950 91 40 > 16, Chemin d'Ecogia Fax: +41 22 950 91 33 > CH-1290 Versoix www: http://isdc.unige.ch/ -- Victor M. Perevoztchikov perev@bnl.gov perev@vxcern.cern.ch Brookhaven National Laboratory MS 510A PO Box 5000 Upton NY 11973-5000 tel office : 631-344-7894; fax 631-344-4206; home 631-345-2690
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 11:50:21 MET