W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fx@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: comments on Matrix

From: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 18:38:45 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD73mdJROTwjsNdCZGcD=vVOJHqys8o_G5ZjimDAPZAVvn3veA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Cc: Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com>, Benoit Jacob <jacob.benoit.1@gmail.com>, "public-fx@w3.org" <public-fx@w3.org>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:47 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Rik Cabanier <cabanier@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe the 2D'ness of a matrix can be implied by its construction and if
> you
> > apply 2d or 3d matrices or operations to it?
>
> I suspect this would be reasonable.  You'd check for explicit 0s in
> the correct indexes at construction time, and then carry around a flag
> for whether it's 2d or not, which gets unset as soon as you perform a
> 3d operation.
>

If we start carrying around internal state based on operations that have
happened on the objects values won't round-trip and two matrices with
identical values will return different answers, which I think will be very
surprising for users.

- James


>
> ~TJ
>
>
Received on Thursday, 21 March 2013 01:39:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 21 March 2013 01:39:13 GMT