Igor Zhuravlov wrote: > Some questions have been arised while writing interfaces. > > Data type > - Current addon realization provides both double and complex interfaces, e.g. > "dgeev.ijs" and "zgeev.ijs". Would it be better to implement single gate > instead, say, "geev.ijs", with embedded dispatching directly to LAPACK's > DGEEV/ZGEEV? > - Some dual routines output different on same input, e.g. DGEES and ZGEES, so > they would have either a separated interfaces or single gate with datatype > specifier. > > Data flow > - Will it be acceptable/desireable to implement additional "low level" > interface (in each correspondent interface file) to deal with non pre- or > post-processed data? This would be useful to chain LAPACK routines (e.g. > ZGERQF and ZUNGRQ) without intermediate twice transpositions, type jiggling > etc.
Thanks for the updates to LAPACK. I agree with both suggestions. Regarding Data type, right now the 'd' version of the interface checks for complex arguments, and if appropriate, calls the complex interface; so this is already similar to your "single gate". It sounds reasonable to make this the default behaviour, and drop the specific 'd' and 'z' versions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
