From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19454 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2008 03:50:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 19445 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Sep 2008 03:50:32 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from web110515.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (HELO web110515.mail.gq1.yahoo.com) (67.195.8.120) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with SMTP; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:49:53 +0000 Received: (qmail 17947 invoked by uid 60001); 25 Sep 2008 03:49:51 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: eSGADA8VM1mj3pBqGSGmQSuQdRA2K7.K2DytvK6bLyYvoz82VKj8xWXfTTn.Zqac0vfFbQU7g8POkPeAL05WGblFyJNSEEeH3R5WQN5ZecA2YXPXlFcaVOBWmThCrAYxAlD_mA4BfuoQgNVSFe9B7WdWvJxNLg-- Received: from [24.185.43.112] by web110515.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 24 Sep 2008 20:49:51 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2 Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:50:00 -0000 From: Z F Reply-To: mail4me9999@yahoo.com Subject: Re: simplicity vs. efficiency of algorithms in GSL To: gsl-discuss@sourceware.org, Gerard Jungman In-Reply-To: <1222301240.30638.146.camel@bellerophon.lanl.gov> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <296286.17807.qm@web110515.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-q3/txt/msg00033.txt.bz2 Hello Jerry, > For the same reason, simplicity vs efficiency is not the > right argument. > Experts should produce the the most efficient code, in some > rational > and usable form, and we should use it. The only thing that > prevents us > from doing this tomorrow is that, as far as I can tell, no > expert has > managed to produce what we need in a rational and usable > form. For me, > rational and usable means that it solves all those tedious > problems > that plague the fortran-to-anything-else interface. At > least that > would be a start. > > Of course, I like things to be neat and tidy; that's > just me. Maybe > other people don't mind having to cobble things > together, but I have > a very low threshold for that. There's no work I do > that is so > compelling that I don't care how painful it is to get > the answer. > And I always want better tools. BRAVO!! ZF