On Dec 3, 8:44 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2007 11:39 AM, mabshoff
>
<SNIP>
>
> > CoCoA or [Ap]CoCoALib? CoCoA is trivial to do, but it will be binary.
>
> I was thinking CoCoALib, sorry.
>
ok.
> > ApCoCoALib compiles out of the box on all of the above and more, but I
> > agree with you that it needs to provide something sufficiently fast or
> > unique to become standard. That is the approximate algebraic
> > algorithms in ApCoCoALib, but we will see about that down the road.
>
> Yep. Let's get it to be optional ASAP though, so people can start
> getting hooked, and know that they need it...
ok.
>
>
> > Agreed, R & ATLAS should be the next thing to work on package-wise.
>
> Excellent. Make it so :-)
>
Well, I will chair the next release unless somebody else will step
forward. My plan was also to work on LinBox - I just got 2 compile
fixes and a segfault in from somebody else in my group that I need to
look at soon.
> > But as far as I understand there is no [efficient] heuristic to choose
> > - but I am certainly not an expert on factorisation, so somebody
> > please enlighten us.
>
> Well if we even had the algorithm implemented, then Joel could
> use an algorithm=... flag to use it. Also, on modern SMP machines,
> if there are two algorithms, we can just run both at the same time
> and use the one that finishes first.
Ok, that certainly makes sense to do, especially since that it the
Sage way ;)
>
> -- William
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
