Hi, On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Sturla Molden <sturla.mol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sturla Molden <sturla.mol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Making a totally new BLAS might seem like a crazy idea, but it might be the >> best solution in the long run. > > To see if this can be done, I'll try to re-implement cblas_dgemm and then > benchmark against MKL, Accelerate and OpenBLAS. If I can get the > performance better than 75% of their speed, without any assembly or dark > magic, just plain C99 compiled with Intel icc, that would be sufficient for > binary wheels on Windows I think.
Did you check out the Intel license though? http://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/95/23/Intel_SW_Dev_Products__EULA.pdf D. DISTRIBUTION: Distribution of the Redistributables is also subject to the following limitations: You (i) shall be solely responsible to your customers for any update or support obligation or other liability which may arise from the distribution, (ii) shall not make any statement that your product is "certified", or that its performance is guaranteed, by Intel, (iii) shall not use Intel's name or trademarks to market your product without written permission, (iv) shall use a license agreement that prohibits disassembly and reverse engineering of the Redistributables, (v) shall indemnify, hold harmless, and defend Intel and its suppliers from and against any claims or lawsuits, including attorney's fees, that arise or result from your distribution of any product. Are you sure that you can redistribute object code statically linked against icc runtimes? Cheers, Matthew _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
