From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 31525 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 2009 18:21:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 31508 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Sep 2009 18:21:39 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.phy.duke.edu (HELO mail.phy.duke.edu) (152.3.182.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:21:31 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.phy.duke.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D994BEE6F; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:18:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.phy.duke.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.phy.duke.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with LMTP id 5gYYk3m0qwSO; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:18:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lilith.rgb.private.net (client212-5.dsl.intrex.net [209.42.212.5]) by mail.phy.duke.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEA1CBEE6B; Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:18:30 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:21:00 -0000 From: "Robert G. Brown" To: Rhys Ulerich cc: gsl-discuss@sourceware.org Subject: Re: GSL 2.0 roadmap (one man's view) In-Reply-To: <4a00655d0909070833q65730bbcgf44546478ff04be3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <48E25CA9.6080306@iki.fi> <498727E5.6080407@iki.fi> <49AA9DB5.6030908@iki.fi> <49FB01D1.30000@iki.fi> <4A7ADFDC.9080408@iki.fi> <1251414774.23092.80.camel@manticore.lanl.gov> <1251414939.23092.82.camel@manticore.lanl.gov> <4a00655d0909070833q65730bbcgf44546478ff04be3@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="8323328-36690134-1252347689=:6806" 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: 2009-q3/txt/msg00039.txt.bz2 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-36690134-1252347689=:6806 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-length: 1001 On Mon, 7 Sep 2009, Rhys Ulerich wrote: >> We could adopt FLAME, which is a much more general framework, C-based >> and faster than LAPACK.  I really think this is a better way to go >> than LAPACK.  Unfortunately it doesn't have so many routines at the >> moment. > > +1 on the idea. The FLAME developers would probably be willing to > fill in the gaps if it meant having FLAME underneath GSL 2.0. They're > nice folks, and they love displacing LAPACK. I've never been that fond of LAPACK anyway -- it's not like it is easy to use and perfectly intuitive anyway. The biggest issue would/will probably be rationalizing the views of vector and matrix so they are sufficiently portable and easy to e.g. pass in and out of ODE solvers and everything else consistently. rgb > > - Rhys > Robert G. Brown http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/ Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305 Durham, N.C. 27708-0305 Phone: 1-919-660-2567 Fax: 919-660-2525 email:rgb@phy.duke.edu --8323328-36690134-1252347689=:6806--