Subject: Re: [boost] different matrix library?
From: DE (satan66613_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-17 09:29:18
on 17.08.2009 at 17:17
Rutger ter Borg wrote :
> Indeed, it should be easy to write. Just as an example, a function "solve"
> would already cover a large portion of the whole of LAPACK. A DSL for linear
> algebra does not need to be complex. The more expressiveness, the better, I
> would say.
just to summarize all the discussion above i say that a clear design
e.g. "x = solve(A, b);" can be a design statement telling that "the user
want to do it that way!"
only THEN comes an implementation wich can be whatever you come up
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk