Re: [boost] different matrix library?

Subject: Re: [boost] different matrix library?
From: Edward Grace (ej.grace_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-18 13:19:18

On 18 Aug 2009, at 17:48, Rutger ter Borg wrote:

> DE wrote:
>>
>> by the way i asked a colleague of mine (who is familiar with  
>> matlab as
>> well as c++) what syntax does he like more? and he said that he
>> prefers c++ (regardles of performance)
>> so my point is that it's a pure matter of taste
>>
>
> Guys, I've looked into GLAS a bit more. Please go read this  
> document of last
> month,
>
> http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/~karlm/glas/tutorial.pdf
>
> It supports everything discussed in this thread, and more! It is  
> available
> on the Internet. It has a Boost community background. Let's stop  
> reinventing
> the wheel at least three times.

Hah hah, I

"Round"
"Square"
"Elliptical"
"Pentagonal" -> Seriously, been done! http://bikehacks.com/china-bike- 
hack/

I'm just trying to stick my oar in to try and make sure scientists  
don't get left out in the cold by people developing scientific  
software...

I take some exception to the 'emotional arguments' as the opposition  
to C++.  If the C++ implementation isn't faster [one day I suspect it  
will be] -- ultimately why should they care?

Thanks,

-ed

------------------------------------------------
"No more boom and bust." -- Dr. J. G. Brown, 1997