Eigen is an awesome algebra/matrix computation c++ library and I'm using it in a developing project. But someone told me not to use it because it depends on standard containers, which is doubtful to me. The reason not to use standard containers is complicated and we just ignore it for now. My question is, does eigen's implementation really depends on the standard containers? I've searched on the Eigen homepage but nothing found. Can anyone help me?
I would rather say no as there are only two very marginal use:
The first one is in IncompleteCholesky where std::vector and std::list are used to hold some temporary objects during the computation, not as member. This class is only used if a user explicitly uses it.
The second one is in SuperLUSupport module, which is a module to support a third library. Again, you cannot use accidentally!
The StlSupport module mentioned by Avi is just a helper module to ease the storage of Eigen's matrices within STL containers.
Yes, but a very little bit. You may not even need those parts, depending on your precise use. You can run a quick grep to see exactly what std:: containers are used and where. In 3.3.0, there is a std::vector member as well as a std::list<>::iterator in ./src/IterativeLinearSolvers/IncompleteCholesky.h, std::vectors are typically used as input for sparse matrices (SparseMatrix::setFromTriplets, although it really needs the iterators).
There is also the ./src/StlSupport/ directory, but I'm not sure that's what you don't want.
Related
I try to code floating adder;
https://github.com/ElectronNest/FPU/blob/master/FloatAdd.scala
This is half way.
The normalization is huge code part, so I would like to use for-loop or some equivalent representation method.
Is it possible to use loop or we need strict coding?
Best,
S.Takano
This is a very general and large question. The equivalent of a for loop in hardware can be implemented using a number of techniques, pretty much all of them involving registers to hold state information. Looking at your code I would suggest that you start a little smaller and work on syntax, I see many syntax errors currently. I use IntelliJ community edition as an editor because it does a great job with helping to get the code properly structured. I also would strongly recommend starting from the chisel-template repository. It has the proper layout and examples of a working circuit and unit testing harness. Then start with a smaller implementation that does something simple like just pass input to output and runs in a test harness, then slowly build up the circuit to achieve your goals.
Good luck!
Welcome and thank you for your interest in Chisel!
I would like to echo Chick's suggestion to start from something small that compiles and simulates and build up from there. In particular, the linked code above conflates some Scala vs. Chisel constructs (eg. Scala's if else, vs. Chisel's when, .elsewhen, .otherwise), as well as some Verilog vs. Chisel concepts (eg. bit indexing with [high:low] vs. Chisel's (high, low))
In case you haven't seen it, I would suggest taking a look at the Chisel Bootcamp which helps explain how to use constructs like for loops to generate hardware.
I'll also plug my own responses to this question on the chisel-users mailing list where I tried to explain some of the intuition behind writing Chisel generators, including differentiating if and when and using for loops.
I'm going to do a presentation about programming languages in our class, gonna talk about the basics. It's going to be a brief one, around 5-10 minutes. The audience has no knowledge in this subject.
One of the things I'm going to talk about is low-level and high-level languages, and machine code. To simplify and visualize the difference I created this image.
But this is just a guess. I'm not sure if this is correct. Probably not. Could you enlighten me on how this process works without going into too much detail?
I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this question. If not, I'll move it to somewhere else. Guide me. Also, about the title and the tags, you can correct them.
What happens largely depends on your environment, so there is no one answer. A general high level view, considering you're starting with what appears to be the C language and assuming its a standard environment (not something such as a Java virtual machine) is that:
A compiler converts C to assembly
An assembler converts assembly to object code (what you show as "low-level language")
A linker gathers one or more file of object code and attempts to fill out its needs with the content of libraries it knows about. This output is still object code, but step 3's object code was for a specific file's instructions only. This object code is in a format appropriate for step 4.
A loader reads the program into memory, potentially satisfying dynamic links that are required to run the program. It takes operating system specific steps to create a process that will execute the program.
(I defined this program in terms of a C++ program because I faced this thing while coding a C++ program, but the actual question is language-agnostic).
I had to copy chars from one char* buffer to another buffer. So, instead of doing a #include <cstring> for strcpy, I wrote a small snippet of code myself to do the same.
Here are the thoughts that I could think of then:
Standard library functions are generally the fastest implementations that one can find of a certain code.
But it would be unwise to include a big header file if you're going to use only a very minor part of it (that's what I think happens).
I want to know how right I was in doing so, and what can be defined as a bound of coding own snippets after which one should revert to using headers.
The first rule of thumb is "don't reinvent the wheel". And remember that your wheel will probably be worse :-) (there are very good programmers that write the wheel provided by your compiler).
But yes, if I had to include the whole boost library for a single function, I would try to directly copy it from the library :-)
I'll add that the question is marked as "language-agnostic", so we can't simply speak about the difference between C/C++ headers and C/C++ libraries. If we speak of a generic language, the inclusion of an external library COULD have side-effects, even BIG side-effects. For example it could slow down very much the startup of your program even if it isn't used (because it has static initializers that need to be called at startup, or it references flocks of other dll/dynamic libraries that need to be loaded). And it wouldn't be the first time there is an error in the startup of a program caused by the static startup of one of its dependancies :-)
So in the end "it depends". I would say that if only have to copy up to one file (let's say 250-500 lines) from a BSD source there isn't any big problem, for anything bigger linking to the library is probably necessary.
#include-ing a header file should have no effect on runtime performance. It may, of course, slow down your compiler.
A decent linker should only pull in the pieces that it actually needs.
When you are talking about performance what do you want to optimize ? Compile time, size of binary/object, speed of execution ?
Using a standard library has the big advantage to improve code Maintainability and Readability. If someone else has to review or modify your code, it is much better to use the "standard" way.
It is much easier to spot a bug when calling memcpy() or strncpy() than when calling MyMemCpy() or MyStringCpy()
Hi
Recently in actionscript it has been made possible to create Classes at runtime. Thi seems quite cool, but I am perplexed thinking of a situation in which this might be useful. Anyone have any ideas?
First of all, the uses for this in ActionScript is limited. So start of understanding what it actually is, and how other languages use it.
See Self-modifying code on wiki:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-modifying_code
Also see Reflection:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_(computer_science)
As an example of how it might be useful, I'm currently working with genetic algorithms to modify code at runtime. This way I can test every permutation (varying initial values and methods) without having to create classes for them, with the added bonus of exporting a .swf only containing the winning permutation.
How does one study open-source libraries code, particularly standard libraries?
The code base is often vast and hard to navigate. How to find some function or class definition?
Do I search through downloaded source files?
Do I need cvs/svn for that?
Maybe web-search?
Should I just know the structure of the standard library?
Is there any reference on it?
Or do some IDEs have such features? Or some other tools?
How to do it effectively without one?
What are the best practices of doing this in any open-source libraries?
Is there any convention of how are sources manipulated on Linux/Unix systems?
What are the differences for specific programming languages?
Broad presentation of the subject is highly encouraged.
I mark this 'community wiki' so everyone can rephrase and expand my awkward formulations!
Update: Probably didn't express the problem clear enough. What I want to, is to view just the source code of some specific library class or function. And the problem is mostly about work organization and usability - how do I navigate in the huge pile of sources to find the thing, maybe there are specific tools or approaches? It feels like there should've long existed some solution(s) for that.
One thing to note is that standard libraries are sometimes (often?) optimized more than is good for most production code.
Because they are widely used, they have to perform well over a wide variety of conditions, and may be full of clever tricks and special logic for corner cases.
Maybe they are not the best thing to study as a beginner.
Just a thought.
Well, I think that it's insane to just site down and read a library's code. My approach is to search whenever I come across the need to implement something by myself and then study the way that it's implemented in those libraries.
And there's also allot of projects/libraries with excellent documentation, which I find more important to read than the code. In Unix based systems you often find valuable information in the man pages.
Wow, that's a big question.
The short answer: it depends.
The long answer:
Some libraries provide documentation while others don't. Standard libraries are usually pretty well documented, whether your chosen implementation of the library includes documentation or not. For instance you may have found an implementation of the c standard library without documentation but the c standard has been around long enough that there are hundreds of good reference books available. Documentation with hyperlinks is a very useful way to learn a new API. In any case the first place I would look is the library's main website
For less well known libraries lacking documentation I find two different approaches very helpful.
First is a doc generator. Nearly every language I know of has one. It basically parses an source tree and creates documentation (usually as html or xml) which can be used to learn a library. Some use specially formatted comments in the code to create more complete documentation. JavaDoc is one good example of this. Doc generators for many other languages borrow from JavaDoc.
Second an IDE with a class browser. These act as a sort of on the fly documentation. Some display just the library's interface. Other's include description comments from the library's source.
Both of these will require access to the libraries source (which will come in handy if you intend actually use a library).
Many of these tools and techniques work equally well for closed/proprietary libraries.
The standard Java libraries' source code is available. For a beginning Java programmer these can be a great read. Especially the Collections framework is a good place to start. Take for instance the implementation of ArrayList and learn how you can implement a resizeable array in Java. Most of the source has even useful comments.
The best parts to read are probably whose purpose you can understand immediately. Start with the easy pieces and try to follow all the steps that are hidden behind that single call you make from your own code.
Something I do from time to time :
apt-get source foo
Then new C++ project (or whatever) in Eclipse and import.
=> Wow ! Browsable ! (use F3)