I am starting to test the LAPACK bindings today (using the Intel MKL on windows right now if anyone cares about that) and will start to give feedback.  Just to confirm, the only "high level" interface we have right now is for "solve" as far as I can tell?  And the documentation isn't yet part of the package?: numeric_bindings_20090209.zip

Also: It will be great when the binding's are in boost proper.  My request is that we have a rough tutorial of how to use traits to bind to ublas generically.  Maybe using a BLAS or LAPACK subset as an example?  I am going to have to write some numeric bindings (which I will submit if they are any good) and would love to have a rough guide of how to go about it.  The generated source code is great, but it is fairly abstract as far as I can tell, and I am not all that competent if you haven't yet figured it out from my asinine questions on this list.

Also:  perhaps before this is submitted it is worth testing rough designs for binding to distributed matrices (e.g. how would PBLAS and SCALAPACK work?).  If those are thought through beforehand, it will make it easier for me to bind to these kinds of things eventually.  I still don't quite understand how bindings takes care of passing in data stored in ublas to underlying routines, vs. hijacking different storage.

And one more question on ublas itself:  I have seen a lot of people ask this, but I got a lot of flack for the lack of the * overloading for matrix-matrix and matrix-vector from the matlab programmers.  Could these be added without too much difficulty?  Am I missing something with expression templates, or could we just have the operator*() use the appropriate overloaded prod (or expression) and have both methods work immediately?  And do you think that w = u*v calling the inner_prod is good semantics?

Thanks again for all this work.  I am now able to do a pretty good sales job on converting the matlab and fortran crowds in my department.

-Jesse