Is anyone else chiming in here planning to be in Galway next week for the De Brun workshop? I'm giving a talk related to doing such computations on more modern hardware and architectures. (I've been playing with a randomized parallel partition backtrack with C and mpi/openmp/cuda.) There was also some discussion recently among a few of us working in this area about getting our own workshop together. I'm all for that, but haven't had much time recently to chime in.
> Just one question: do we have the manpower, within the Sage community, > to maintain this code in the long run? While manpower is an issue, I don't think it is the main issue. I think there are currently an appropriate number (perhaps a small number) of those that know the theory and know an acceptable language (C, Python, Cython, etc.). The main problem, as I see it, is that the majority of code, as it has existed over roughly 20 years, is nearly inaccessible. This is true especially of backtrack code. The only real exception I see to accessibility of the theory is in the partition backtrack algorithms themselves. Those simply need to be written in a language that is appropriate for consumption. As far as I know, nobody has really done this. Has anyone done this? I don't think it would be hard. (E.g., for my purposes I use a language much more like I.G. Macdonald's text... although this blurs the difference between partitions and set compositions.) Jason -- Jason B. Hill http://math.jasonbhill.com | jason.b.h...@colorado.edu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-combinat-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-combinat-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-combinat-devel?hl=en.
