You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
for some operations in operator.cpp, the input signals count from 1 (sin1). However, sometimes they also count from 0 (sin0). There is also the possibility to get both versions after calling op.setSignalNumber(2):
I am responsible from this choice. I would be in favor of starting from 0 in all cases. The rationale behind this choice is the following.
At the beginning, there was entity like addition of two vectors, matrices... which were taking 2 entries, with input signals sin1 and sin2. I replaced them so that they take N entries. To keep backward, the new entities are initialized at construction with 2 input signals with the same name as before.
Then, in setSignalNumber, there was no reason to keep the old convention since this command is part of the new API. Maybe I should have kept the old convention.
Hi folks,
for some operations in
operator.cpp
, the input signals count from 1 (sin1
). However, sometimes they also count from 0 (sin0
). There is also the possibility to get both versions after callingop.setSignalNumber(2)
:Note how the signal names count from zero in the last case.
My proposal is to agree on a value for the first index and then make sure all
operator.cpp
uses the same convention.Happy to send a PR once you let me know which counting to use.
Best,
julian
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: