ceres-solver VS polars

I can't reply to the guy saying julia is the only one. But there are others.

Ceres uses dual numbers

https://github.com/ceres-solver/ceres-solver/blob/master/inc...

This library from google is used everywhere in robotics, so it's hardly some backwater little side project.

So does c++ autodiff

http://ceres-solver.org (if you want to implement it manually, see tutorials & openCV sfm module)

http://ceres-solver.org/ works well, in my experience.

Hey, people! I was wondering if there is a library for non-linear optimization, equivalent to that for Ceres Solver that you have in C++?

I've not yet seen anything comparable to http://ceres-solver.org/

Disclaimer: I'm one of the authors of Ceres Solver which is widely used for solving computational geometry problems in computer vision. I also wrote TinySolver. And nowadays, I focus on Pigweed; a collection of embedded libraries targeting high-volume consumer electronics products. It's fun to see an overlap of these two areas expertise!

This is because 0.1 is in actuality the floating point value value 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625, and thus 1 divided by it is ever so slightly smaller than 10. Nevertheless, fpround(1 / fpround(1 / 10)) = 10 exactly.

I found out about this recently because in Polars I defined a // b for floats to be (a / b).floor(), which does return 10 for this computation. Since Python's correctly-rounded division is rather expensive, I chose to stick to this (more context: https://github.com/pola-rs/polars/issues/14596#issuecomment-...).

https://github.com/pola-rs/polars/releases/tag/py-0.19.0

That turned out to be related to pola-rs/polars#11912, and this linked comment provided a deceptively simple solution - use PARSE_DECLTYPES when creating the connection: