Right then. Perhaps the best alternative is to write a wrapper for common LP and LS solvers, based on the assumption that no combination of our efforts will ever out-match other open-source implementations. Does that seem a reasonable summer project? Write a wrapper around LAPACK, similar to LAPACK++? On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Thomas Klimpel <Thomas.Klimpel@synopsys.com
wrote:
Chad Seibert wrote:
Yes, it does. However, it seems inappropriate to write an LP library for Boost that uses LAPACK to do the linear algebra stuff. If we wanted to go down that road, we could just write a wrapper for an existing lp library instead, like what OpenOpt does.
I have to disagree here. We have Boost.MPI, which builds on top of existing MPI implementations instead of trying to reinvent MPI. Now the sandbox numeric bindings project (< http://svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/numeric_bindings>) probably will never be able to compete with Boost.MPI in terms of perfection, but it seems to be quite usable nevertheless. There are projects like NT2 or eigen, which try to do better/different than BLAS/LAPACK and succeeded more or less. However, I don't see which benefit it would bring if you try to compete with them during a GSOC project.
Regards, Thomas _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost