2009/3/23 Jason Moxham <ja...@njkfrudils.plus.com>: > > > MPFR is based on mpn and mpz , not mpf .
OK, I didn't seem to know that. I probably should have though. > > I suppose we get remove mpf from the default MPIR build , and only build mpf > if we configure with --enable-gmp-compat which could switch on all the other > old stuff we would like to remove. > Would that actually cut down the size of MPIR? I also don't see how say switching off nails and mpbsd, etc, would actually save development effort. If someone types --enable-gmp-compat then all that is going to have to be there (and work) anyway. Bill. > > On Monday 23 March 2009 16:18:56 Bill Hart wrote: >> Hi Mariah, >> >> This would make MPIR unusable in Sage as a drop in replacement for >> GMP, and it would prevent people from using MPIR instead of GMP as a >> base for MPFR. >> >> However, if MPFR becomes independent of the mpf layer in GMP, as I >> suspect it may in the future, then it is a possibility worth >> considering. Though I'd still be worried about packages which want to >> use the mpf layer from GMP and use MPIR as a drop-in replacement. >> >> Bill. >> >> 2009/3/23 Mariah <mariah.le...@gmail.com>: >> > Bill, >> > >> > As a suggestion on something that could be removed from >> > MPIR, had you considered removing the mpf code? I was >> > under the impression that MPIR was going to concentrate on >> > multiple-precision integers and rationals, and >> > leave multiple-precision floating-point to MPFR. >> > >> > Mariah >> > >> > On Mar 20, 11:30 pm, Gonzalo Tornaria <torna...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Bill Hart <goodwillh...@googlemail.com> > wrote: >> >> > I suppose it's just aggregation. >> >> > >> >> > Maybe we need to get rid of the bit that says, "overall licensed >> >> > LGPL". Is that still permitted, when some component of the distro is >> >> > GPL? >> >> >> >> Sounds like a good idea. >> >> >> >> > Actually the reason for me wanting to perhaps get rid of the demos was >> >> > more to do with the fact that I don't know anyone who uses them. Very >> >> > clear examples in the documentation would probably be much more >> >> > useful. >> >> >> >> I haven't looked at the demos, but I did want to use the benchmark and >> >> I didn't get to it until your posted howto (not that it was that hard, >> >> but I was lazy). I expect more people will use it if "make bench" just >> >> works. >> >> >> >> I'm not arguing to keep the demos, nor I am saying that benchmark code >> >> should not be rewritten and expanded. But just not because of >> >> licensing. >> >> >> >> > Anyhow, it's no big deal. Just an idea. I suppose the thing that set >> >> > off that thought process for me was Brian saying it took forever to >> >> > check out MPIR via his internet connection. We are carrying some fat. >> >> > There's no reason to not have the demos on the website. Can't come up >> >> > with as clear a case for leaving them in the library source. >> >> >> >> Sounds fair if demos are indeed big, I have no idea how much space >> >> they take (otoh, I think Brian was updating the root of the svn repo >> >> instead of just trunk). The benchmark code is about 6kb compressed... >> >> not too bad. >> >> >> >> Gonzalo >> >> > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to mpir-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mpir-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
