On Saturday, 12 October 2013 at 06:24:58 UTC, FreeSlave wrote:
For these cases we may let users to choose low-level backend if
they need. High-level interface and default implementation are
needed anyway.
I called it std.linalg because there is website
http://www.linalg.org/ about C++ library for exact
computational linear algebra. Also SciD has module scid.linalg.
We can use std.linearalgebra or something else. Names are not
really important now.
Ok, things are more clear now. Today I look what I can do.
There are litterally dozens of linear algebra packages: Eigen,
Armadillo, Blitz++, IT++, etc.
I was not complaining about the linalg name, but about the fact
that you want to make it a std subpackage. I contend that if you
want to make it a std package, it must be nearly perfect, i.e
better performing than ALL the other alternatives, even the C++
ones, and that it's really good as an API. Else it will be
deprecated because someone will have made a better alternative.
Given the number of past tries, I consider this project is very
likely doomed to failure. So no std please.
