Ingvar Stepanyan

I definitely like the new Display without type names, as well as usage of `#` for expanded form. Few questions though: 1. Why is e.g. Scale normal using `[1.0, 2.0]`...

> * You can directly take the debug output and copy-paste it into your code, using `matrix!` or `dmatrix!`. For me this is a big deal, because it's something I...

> @RReverser: vectors _are_ matrices, so they'd be printed as e.g. `[1; 2; 3]`, which is not _currently_ compatible with the `vector!` macro (but you could use the `matrix!` macro)....

> What you're describing is exactly the behavior of `matrix!` ;-) > > `vector!` really only exists to make it more explicit that you're building a (column) vector, because vectors...

> and making Point consistent with this I've said this before, but I'd really want to keep single-line Points for short Display. The fact they're columns in nalgebra feels almost...

> I feel like it would be a bit inconsistent for `Vector` to be vertical while a `Point` with the same data is horizontal Personally, I think that's fine since...

I only just ran into this too. I didn't realise that nalgebra implements e.g. `Mul` for both values and references, which results in compiler choosing the most obvious matching trait....

Hmm. In my original use-case I do need solving overdetermined systems for least squares, and due to #672 SVD is my only option. But yeah, when testing, I'm finding great...

> We could do the second by truncating singular values smaller than ϵσmax, where σmax is the largest singular value. This does however break down for the zero matrix, so...

Unfortunately, even for near-zero values this method is too problematic, e.g.: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=d4e2d88ede0b5ce43e19ecf931c834b8 I guess my only hope is that someone implements #672 someday.