> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 10:25:55 +0200
> From: "Jürgen v.Hagen" <[log in to unmask]>
> Hello,
>
> For some filtering of matrices I need to act on the real and the
> imaginary part seperately (the filter is real). For now, I
> copy the real (and imaginary) part into a temporary matrix, and
> act on these like:
> temp(1:N,1:N) = real(mat(1:N,1:N)
> call filter(filtercoefs, temp)
> erg(1:N,1:N) = temp(1:N,1:N)
>
> temp(1:N,1:N) = real(mat(1:N,1:N)
==============^^^^
Do you mean aimag?
> call filter(filtercoefs, temp)
> erg(1:N,1:N) = erg(1:N,1:N) + cmplx(0.0, temp(1:N,1:N))
Why not erg(...) = cmplx(erg(1:N,1:N), temp(1:N,1:N)) ?
> However I was wondering if the storage scheme of complex numbers is
> defined in the standard, or if the storage scheme was just adopted by
> all compiler manufacturers. If it was standardized, a 2-stride "real" access
> of the complex matrix would yield the real (or the imaginary) parts.
>
> so: is the storage scheme of complex numbers standardized?
No.
> thanks
> juergen
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|