diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/Pitfalls.dox')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/Pitfalls.dox | 121 |
1 files changed, 5 insertions, 116 deletions
diff --git a/doc/Pitfalls.dox b/doc/Pitfalls.dox index 85282bd6f..cf42effef 100644 --- a/doc/Pitfalls.dox +++ b/doc/Pitfalls.dox @@ -2,35 +2,13 @@ namespace Eigen { /** \page TopicPitfalls Common pitfalls - \section TopicPitfalls_template_keyword Compilation error with template methods See this \link TopicTemplateKeyword page \endlink. - -\section TopicPitfalls_aliasing Aliasing - -Don't miss this \link TopicAliasing page \endlink on aliasing, -especially if you got wrong results in statements where the destination appears on the right hand side of the expression. - - -\section TopicPitfalls_alignment_issue Alignment Issues (runtime assertion) - -%Eigen does explicit vectorization, and while that is appreciated by many users, that also leads to some issues in special situations where data alignment is compromised. -Indeed, prior to C++17, C++ does not have quite good enough support for explicit data alignment. -In that case your program hits an assertion failure (that is, a "controlled crash") with a message that tells you to consult this page: -\code -http://eigen.tuxfamily.org/dox/group__TopicUnalignedArrayAssert.html -\endcode -Have a look at \link TopicUnalignedArrayAssert it \endlink and see for yourself if that's something that you can cope with. -It contains detailed information about how to deal with each known cause for that issue. - -Now what if you don't care about vectorization and so don't want to be annoyed with these alignment issues? Then read \link getrid how to get rid of them \endlink. - - \section TopicPitfalls_auto_keyword C++11 and the auto keyword -In short: do not use the auto keywords with %Eigen's expressions, unless you are 100% sure about what you are doing. In particular, do not use the auto keyword as a replacement for a \c Matrix<> type. Here is an example: +In short: do not use the auto keywords with Eigen's expressions, unless you are 100% sure about what you are doing. In particular, do not use the auto keyword as a replacement for a Matrix<> type. Here is an example: \code MatrixXd A, B; @@ -38,112 +16,23 @@ auto C = A*B; for(...) { ... w = C * v; ...} \endcode -In this example, the type of C is not a \c MatrixXd but an abstract expression representing a matrix product and storing references to \c A and \c B. -Therefore, the product of \c A*B will be carried out multiple times, once per iteration of the for loop. -Moreover, if the coefficients of `A` or `B` change during the iteration, then `C` will evaluate to different values as in the following example: - -\code -MatrixXd A = ..., B = ...; -auto C = A*B; -MatrixXd R1 = C; -A = ...; -MatrixXd R2 = C; -\endcode -for which we end up with `R1` ≠ `R2`. - +In this example, the type of C is not a MatrixXd but an abstract expression representing a matrix product and storing references to A and B. Therefore, the product of A*B will be carried out multiple times, once per iteration of the for loop. Moreover, if the coefficients of A or B change during the iteration, then C will evaluate to different values. Here is another example leading to a segfault: \code auto C = ((A+B).eval()).transpose(); // do something with C \endcode -The problem is that \c eval() returns a temporary object (in this case a \c MatrixXd) which is then referenced by the \c Transpose<> expression. -However, this temporary is deleted right after the first line, and then the \c C expression references a dead object. -One possible fix consists in applying \c eval() on the whole expression: -\code -auto C = (A+B).transpose().eval(); -\endcode - -The same issue might occur when sub expressions are automatically evaluated by %Eigen as in the following example: +The problem is that eval() returns a temporary object (in this case a MatrixXd) which is then referenced by the Transpose<> expression. However, this temporary is deleted right after the first line, and there the C expression reference a dead object. The same issue might occur when sub expressions are automatically evaluated by Eigen as in the following example: \code VectorXd u, v; auto C = u + (A*v).normalized(); // do something with C \endcode -Here the \c normalized() method has to evaluate the expensive product \c A*v to avoid evaluating it twice. -Again, one possible fix is to call \c .eval() on the whole expression: +where the normalized() method has to evaluate the expensive product A*v to avoid evaluating it twice. On the other hand, the following example is perfectly fine: \code auto C = (u + (A*v).normalized()).eval(); \endcode -In this case, \c C will be a regular \c VectorXd object. -Note that DenseBase::eval() is smart enough to avoid copies when the underlying expression is already a plain \c Matrix<>. - - -\section TopicPitfalls_header_issues Header Issues (failure to compile) - -With all libraries, one must check the documentation for which header to include. -The same is true with %Eigen, but slightly worse: with %Eigen, a method in a class may require an additional \c \#include over what the class itself requires! -For example, if you want to use the \c cross() method on a vector (it computes a cross-product) then you need to: -\code -#include<Eigen/Geometry> -\endcode -We try to always document this, but do tell us if we forgot an occurrence. - - -\section TopicPitfalls_ternary_operator Ternary operator - -In short: avoid the use of the ternary operator <code>(COND ? THEN : ELSE)</code> with %Eigen's expressions for the \c THEN and \c ELSE statements. -To see why, let's consider the following example: -\code -Vector3f A; -A << 1, 2, 3; -Vector3f B = ((1 < 0) ? (A.reverse()) : A); -\endcode -This example will return <code>B = 3, 2, 1</code>. Do you see why? -The reason is that in c++ the type of the \c ELSE statement is inferred from the type of the \c THEN expression such that both match. -Since \c THEN is a <code>Reverse<Vector3f></code>, the \c ELSE statement A is converted to a <code>Reverse<Vector3f></code>, and the compiler thus generates: -\code -Vector3f B = ((1 < 0) ? (A.reverse()) : Reverse<Vector3f>(A)); -\endcode -In this very particular case, a workaround would be to call A.reverse().eval() for the \c THEN statement, but the safest and fastest is really to avoid this ternary operator with %Eigen's expressions and use a if/else construct. - - -\section TopicPitfalls_pass_by_value Pass-by-value - -If you don't know why passing-by-value is wrong with %Eigen, read this \link TopicPassingByValue page \endlink first. - -While you may be extremely careful and use care to make sure that all of your code that explicitly uses %Eigen types is pass-by-reference you have to watch out for templates which define the argument types at compile time. - -If a template has a function that takes arguments pass-by-value, and the relevant template parameter ends up being an %Eigen type, then you will of course have the same alignment problems that you would in an explicitly defined function passing %Eigen types by reference. - -Using %Eigen types with other third party libraries or even the STL can present the same problem. -<code>boost::bind</code> for example uses pass-by-value to store arguments in the returned functor. -This will of course be a problem. - -There are at least two ways around this: - - If the value you are passing is guaranteed to be around for the life of the functor, you can use boost::ref() to wrap the value as you pass it to boost::bind. Generally this is not a solution for values on the stack as if the functor ever gets passed to a lower or independent scope, the object may be gone by the time it's attempted to be used. - - The other option is to make your functions take a reference counted pointer like boost::shared_ptr as the argument. This avoids needing to worry about managing the lifetime of the object being passed. - - -\section TopicPitfalls_matrix_bool Matrices with boolean coefficients - -The current behaviour of using \c Matrix with boolean coefficients is inconsistent and likely to change in future versions of Eigen, so please use it carefully! - -A simple example for such an inconsistency is - -\code -template<int Size> -void foo() { - Eigen::Matrix<bool, Size, Size> A, B, C; - A.setOnes(); - B.setOnes(); - - C = A * B - A * B; - std::cout << C << "\n"; -} -\endcode - -since calling \c foo<3>() prints the zero matrix while calling \c foo<10>() prints the identity matrix. - +In this case, C will be a regular VectorXd object. */ } |