Merge(Circulant, MLCirulant) and Merge(Toeplitz, MLToeplitz)
ChristophWWagner opened this issue · 2 comments
As both effectively already share most of its code there is no reason not to combine them as from a user's perspective why should it be different to instantiate a Circulant matrix with a ndarray and get something with multiple levels?
Does it actually make sense to merge MLToeplitz with Toeplitz?
The iterfaces are:
Toeplitz(vecC, vecR)
MLToeplitz(tenT)Furthermore, MLToeplitz implicitly generates levels of square shape (we should stress this point a bit in the docs, at least with a hint) whereas Toeplitz can handle arbitrary shape.
Of course we could handle both cases transparently but then merging would not help things.
I would suggest to just merge when we can achieve a consistent interface for both, i.e. Toeplitz(tenC, tenR) and have arbitrary level-shape support for Toeplitz
Resolved in #69