Subject: Re: [boost] different matrix library?
From: DE (satan66613_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-11 14:15:50
on 11.08.2009 at 21:52
joel wrote :
> Best approach is always do, show, convince.
> I was burned with my own Boost.SIMD proposal.
> It's better to work first THEN show off.
> For my own work, see :
> and the old page at sourceforge :
> I had a bit of discussion in the ML before, with comaprison w/r to Eigen
i'll run through that links
for now listen
as i can see you are familiar to simd programming
so when i researched the expression template based impementation of
vector operations i tried to use sse2 though compiler intrinsics
(since they are de facto portable)
but i did not get any benefit for doubles
i think that's because load/store operations consumed boost from
actual add_pd's etc.
so evaluating something like (pairwise for sse2)
vec + vec*scalar - vec + element_wise_mul(vec, vec)
yields the same time for sse2 and plain implementations
however for floats i got significant boost (~2 however not 4)
so since i prefer doubles i droped such simd optimizations (but they
are still easily possible)
i'm interested about what you can say on this
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk