From: stefan (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-02-06 22:36:01
On 2020-02-06 5:28 p.m., Janek Kozicki via Boost wrote:
> I agree that writing FFT which supports all multiprecision types is a
> tremendous task. But if it's not in GSoC it has a really hard chance
> of being completed, ever. So maybe the right approach is to split this
> task into several smaller sub-tasks?
The point is not that it's a lot of work. It's that the idea to
re-implement FFT from scratch inside Boost is foolish, given the
availability and quality of existing FFT libraries.
That being said, if you think you can come up with a better API (using
modern C++), I think there *might* be value in providing (very thin)
wrappers around those existing libs. But reimplementing them from
scratch, and hope to get to a similar level of quality with a reasonable
amount of effort, that's extremely naive.
-- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk