Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
#206 closed enhancement (fixed)
is matrix:set(const matrix&) needed?
| Reported by: | Peter | Owned by: | Jari Häkkinen |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | major | Milestone: | yat 0.3 (Public release) |
| Component: | utility | Version: | |
| Keywords: | Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
Since the new implementation of assignment operator, I wonder if set function really is needed. If it is not needed I think it should be removed. This issue applies also to vector class.
Change History (4)
comment:1 Changed 17 years ago by
| Component: | classifier → utility |
|---|---|
| Owner: | changed from Markus Ringnér to Peter |
comment:2 Changed 17 years ago by
| Description: | modified (diff) |
|---|
comment:3 Changed 17 years ago by
| Owner: | changed from Peter to Jari Häkkinen |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → assigned |
comment:4 Changed 17 years ago by
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | assigned → closed |
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
Remove the set() function, also change name on the set_* functions, i.e., remove set_ where appropriate. Also, update documentation to explicitly say that the functions are convenience functions and also add a sample of how to do it using views.