This is the mail archive of the
gsl-discuss@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GSL project.
Re: GSL v2.0 discussion
- From: Jean-François Caron <jfcaron at phas dot ubc dot ca>
- To: Patrick Alken <patrick dot alken at Colorado dot EDU>
- Cc: "gsl-discuss at sourceware dot org" <gsl-discuss at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:41:05 -0700
- Subject: Re: GSL v2.0 discussion
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <533EE354 dot 4050204 at colorado dot edu> <533EE585 dot 40301 at colorado dot edu>
> 1. Should we try to add lapack/flame interfaces for the 2.0 release or wait until 3.0?
Unless an individual specifically volunteers for this job, we should not delay.
> 2. Is it better to select gsllinalg/lapack/flame at compile time or link time?
Selecting at compile time sounds more reasonable. If a user really needs to use both LA libs with GSL, they should be advanced enough to be able to install parallel versions of GSL.
> 4. What should we do about error handling in libflame? Just accept the abort() behavior?
File a bug report with libflame?
> 5. Is there a strong preference for doing wrappers for both lapack and flame? Should we only interface to lapack, due to the difficulties with flame (global state, abort() error handling)? Should we only interface to flame due to its more modern design?
If only one of the libs was an option, I would vote for LAPACK, since it’s much more commonly used & well-known.
Jean-François