This bugzilla service is closed. All entries have been migrated to
Bug 1192 - SparseMatrix::InnerIterator is missing comparison operators
Summary: SparseMatrix::InnerIterator is missing comparison operators
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Eigen
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Sparse (show other bugs)
Version: 3.2
Hardware: All All
: Normal Unknown
Assignee: Nobody
Depends on:
Reported: 2016-04-05 17:44 UTC by Matthew Woehlke
Modified: 2019-12-04 15:37 UTC (History)
2 users (show)


Description Matthew Woehlke 2016-04-05 17:44:27 UTC
There are no comparison operators for SparseMatrix::InnerIterator, but there is a non-explicit (which maybe should be explicit!) conversion operator to bool. As a result, a naïve attempt to compare these iterators compiles, but is subtly broken because the result tests if both iterators are *valid*, not if both iterators are the *same*.

This caused a program crash in our application (MapGUI) due to use of such iterators (via [1]) in an emulated ranged-based for loop ([2]) which compares a 'current' and 'previous' iterator in order to implement a do-once loop (used to declare a local variable in the init block of the for loop).

[2] (see the not-C++11, not-boost implementation)

Please implement == and != operators for this iterator, as are expected to be defined for iterators.
Comment 1 Matthew Woehlke 2016-04-05 18:05:50 UTC
I can work around this issue because the loop comparison is calling the operator== of a wrapping iterator, and I can add a work-around to that implementation. In general, however, there is a nasty and subtle behavior with the current implementation:

  InnerIterator iter = ...; // precondition: iter is valid
  auto sentinel = iter;
  for (auto value = *iter; iter == sentinel; ++iter)
  { ... }

From casual examination, the above loop should execute exactly once. This is not the actual behavior. (This is a simplification of the logic that's causing us trouble.)
Comment 2 Nobody 2019-12-04 15:37:08 UTC
-- GitLab Migration Automatic Message --

This bug has been migrated to's GitLab instance and has been closed from further activity.

You can subscribe and participate further through the new bug through this link to our GitLab instance:

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.