This is the mail archive of the
gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GSL project.
Re: GSL API design flaws
- To: Gerard Jungman <jungman at lanl dot gov>
- Subject: Re: GSL API design flaws
- From: "Gregory R. Warnes" <warnes at biostat dot washington dot edu>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 00:15:53 +0000 (GMT)
- cc: "E. Robert Tisdale" <edwin at netwood dot net>, gsl-discuss at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Gerard Jungman wrote:
GJ>> "E. Robert Tisdale" wrote:
GJ>> >
GJ>> > Brian Gough wrote:
GJ>> >
GJ>> > > The goal of the project is really just to provide a free library
GJ>> > > equivalent to existing proprietary libraries
GJ>> > > such as IMSL, NAG and Numerical Recipes.
GJ>> > > So we just follow the existing conventions
GJ>> > > from these libraries with some minor improvements.
GJ>> >
GJ>> > That's a disappointment.
GJ>>
GJ>> Yes, it is. But we're not the source of the
GJ>> disappointment; it is a simple fact that the
GJ>> state of the art "products" in this field
GJ>> fall far short of technical expectations.
[...]
GJ>> GSL is not the place for free jazz explorations
GJ>> on numerical library themes. It's just a hammer.
GJ>> You use it to pound nails. Higher levels of
GJ>> sophistication must wait. I don't like it any
GJ>> more than you do, but those are the facts.
It may be dissappointing that GSL isn't the next generation tool, but it
is very useful as it is.
In addition, the availability of a free software numerical library that is
complete, reliable, and well maintained will provide a nice foundation for
work on future numerical libraries.
-Greg