I think netlib-java might actually be using the CLAPACK version of LAPACK... the biggest problem with C/Fortran is the array indexing is different for double[][]. CLAPACK addresses this.
LAPACK is still heavily used in reference implementations of standard algorithms, although admittedly not as *core* as BLAS. The ARPACK API is also worthwhile considering for inclusion (it's part of netlib-java and f2j's translations). Luc Maisonobe wrote: > > I strongly approve that for BLAS. I dream of the BLAS API being > mandatory in JVM implementations, but this will probably never happen. > Considering LAPACK, I am less convinced because the API is strongly > fortran-oriented, not using some of the object-oriented features that > are well suited for mathematical concepts. The algorithms and their > implementations are very good, and we already use them inside, but with > a different API. > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/commons-math%2C-matrix-toolkits-java-and-consolidation-tp23537813p23575455.html Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
