Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/16/07, *Kevin Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > This is a bit of a SciPy question, but I thought I'd ask here since > I'm already subscribed. I'd like to add some new LAPACK bindings to > SciPy and was wondering if there was a minimum version requirement > for LAPACK, since it would be ideal if I could use some of the newer > 3.0 features. In addition to using some block methods only added in > 3.0, it is very convenient to use the WORK=-1 for space queries > instead of reimplementing the underlying logic in the calc_work module. > > The routines of most interest to me are: > DGELSD > DGGGLM > DGGLSE > > STEGR > > Thanks for all of the feedback on sqrtm. Can anyone comment on the > suitability of adding LAPACK 3.0 functions to SciPy.LinAlg? I need to > do the work regardless, but being able to contribute it back would be > very nice.
And we'd certainly appreciate the contribution. I'm tentatively going to say yes, we should start requiring LAPACK 3.0 unless if there is some very important platform that only comes with an older LAPACK. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
