On Jan 15, 6:35 pm, doug5y <dou...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Doug,
> It built ok and all test passed! ( sage --testall -long ).
Cool.
> Now I have to actually test weather fft's are that much faster. But
> that's not your problem.
Well, please let us know how it compares to the existing FFT code in
Sage. I am not 100% sure what will happen to the FFTW bindings in
Scipy 0.7 (there is some kind of reorganization going on), but it is
completely doable to at FFTW support (or some other FFT in case it is
faster) to the default setup of Sage in case there is demand.
> Thanks again for you help!
Anytime, feel free to ask us questions if you have them. That is what
sage-support is for :)
> Cheers,
> Doug N
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-support@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-support-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
