[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Axiom-developer] Re: [Gcl-devel] NAG libraries

From: C Y
Subject: [Axiom-developer] Re: [Gcl-devel] NAG libraries
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 20:34:32 -0700 (PDT)

--- James Amundson <address@hidden> wrote:
> > As a NAG replacement the most logical one seems to be slatec, to
> > the newbie eye at least - I suppose fortran might not help if all 
> > the calls have to be redone to conform to a non-NAG interface 
> > anyway.
> Why don't you think GSL would be the logical choice? Because it is C
> instead of Fortran? That shouldn't matter much.

If switching to C from Fortran isn't a problem as far as restructuring
axiom is concerned, then I agree GSL is definitely the logical choice. 
My working assumption was that NAG Fortran calls -> SLATEC Fortran
calls would be an easier mapping than NAG Fortran calls -> GSL C calls,
but if that's not true than GSL is of course a much more logical choice
- maintained and modernized.
> > CERNLIB is largely fortran and GPLed, IIRC, but the site seems to
> > indicate they use NAG for some parts of the system so it probably
> > doesn't duplicate enough NAG functionality to be useful.
> Actually, the folks at CERN are considering switching from NAG to
> GSL. I don't know if a decision has been made.

Oh, cool.  :-)  If they do, perhaps an axiom+GSL combination could make
use of cernlib as well.


Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]