+1 for including MPC (initially as an alternative if that is deemed a safer way to proceed).
John On 8 February 2010 01:15, YannLC <yannlaiglecha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jan 7, 10:19 am, Alex Ghitza <aghi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This is maybe an obvious point, but I'll make it anyway:MPCis "brought >> to you by the makers of MPFR". They care a great deal about correctness, >> performance, and portability. Both packages are actively developed and >> extensively tested. I think that if the performance cost is small, we >> would gain a whole lot in terms of reliability. >> >> Best, >> Alex > > Just to add some credits, GCC (since 4.5) now requires MPC too. > > Yann > > -- > To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to > sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel > URL: http://www.sagemath.org > -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
