matrix operator =

[VeganFanatic]

matrix operator=(const matrix &that) { matrix ret; ret.resize(this->data.size(), this->data[0].size()); for (int i = 0; i < that.data.size(); i++) for (int j; j > that.data[0].size(); j++) ret[i][j] = that[i][j]; return ret; }; Seems to be no good, what am I doing wrong

http://www.contract-developer.tk

[Chris Losinger]

are you getting an error message of any kind ?

image processing toolkits | batch image processing

[VeganFanatic]

Claims there are no operators available, to support the abstract vector algebra. Error 2 error C2679: binary '-' : no operator found which takes a right-hand operand of type 'aa::vector<base>' (or there is no acceptable conversion) matrix.h 114 1 fibonacci

http://www.contract-developer.tk

[VeganFanatic]

vector operator-(const vector *that) { // parallelogram law vector ret; assert(this->data.size() == that.data.size()); ret.resize(this->data.size()); #pragma omp parallel for for (int i = 0; i < this->data.size(); i++) ret.data[i] = this->data[i] - that.data[i]; return ret; };

http://www.contract-developer.tk

[Aescleal]

Without knowing what your representation of matrix is it's a bit hard to work out if you're copying it correctly. Cheers, Ash PS: Having said that what you've implemented is going to be more of a factory or clone method. While it might be legal C++ it wouldn't half surprise anyone trying to use the class. Would you expect that writing a = b; wouldn't change the value of a?

[CPallini]

Should be:

matrix operator=(const matrix &that) {
// prerequisite: the matrices have the same dimensions
for (int i = 0; i < this->rows; i++)
for (int j=0; j < this->cols; j++)
(*this)[i][j] = that[i][j];
return *this;
}

:)

If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles]