Bjørn-Helge Mevik wrote: >> If you are concerned about performance you definitely do not want to use >> shared R, not a shared BLAS. >> > > I'm sorry, I don't quite follow you here. Do you mean not create a shared R > and not create a shared BLAS, or was there a "not" too many? > "Nor", I think. (One of a set of confusing typos. Others include "not" instead of "now" or "note". Note that I would ever make such silly mistakes.)
As for the subject matter, you _can_ actually create such at thing as an optimized, shared BLAS/Lapack, and it is probably faster than an unoptimized, shared one (well, at least you could create them when I played with this some years ago). It's just that people think it is a bit silly, so they are not doing it for you, and as I recall it, you also need to tinker a bit more than usual with the build process of the libraries. -- O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard Øster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FAX: (+45) 35327907 ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel