s**i
发帖数: 381 | 1 Are they both necessary for scientific computations with C++?
It seems to me that lapack++ also has some kind of Matrix and Vector
definitions
so what is the advantage of using Blitz++(Or something similar such as Boost,
MTL) ? |
A*g
发帖数: 102 | 2 why not gsl?
Boost,
【在 s**i 的大作中提到】
: Are they both necessary for scientific computations with C++?
: It seems to me that lapack++ also has some kind of Matrix and Vector
: definitions
: so what is the advantage of using Blitz++(Or something similar such as Boost,
: MTL) ?
|
s***t
发帖数: 195 | 3 never used blitz++, but from what i read, blitz++ is not a replacement
of lapack. it's more like blas, probably. but i would imagine
blitz++ is not compatible with lapack.
Boost,
【在 s**i 的大作中提到】
: Are they both necessary for scientific computations with C++?
: It seems to me that lapack++ also has some kind of Matrix and Vector
: definitions
: so what is the advantage of using Blitz++(Or something similar such as Boost,
: MTL) ?
|
s**i
发帖数: 381 | 4 GSL under Windows using MSVC++ is not easy ba? Need to buy the CD?
http://www.network-theory.co.uk/gsl/
I am developing a cross platform thing so I need to consider the portability.
Thanks
【在 A*g 的大作中提到】
: why not gsl?
:
: Boost,
|
j**o
发帖数: 61 | 5 you can use dev-c++ to compile the program. it's easy to use gsl in dev-c++.
portability.
【在 s**i 的大作中提到】
: GSL under Windows using MSVC++ is not easy ba? Need to buy the CD?
: http://www.network-theory.co.uk/gsl/
: I am developing a cross platform thing so I need to consider the portability.
: Thanks
|
x*****u
发帖数: 3419 | 6 It's so strange that I've never need Matrix or Vector operations...
Boost,
【在 s**i 的大作中提到】
: Are they both necessary for scientific computations with C++?
: It seems to me that lapack++ also has some kind of Matrix and Vector
: definitions
: so what is the advantage of using Blitz++(Or something similar such as Boost,
: MTL) ?
|
s*******g
发帖数: 4 | 7 blitz++ is designed to be a multi-dimensional array library (a very fast one),
not
a linear algebra library (such as boost::ublas or lapack++). For instance,
blitz++
does not provide sparse matrices. A look at lapack++ website
http://math.nist.gov/lapack++/
seems to imply that it is not actively developed (last update in 2000).
boost::multi_array also provides multi-dimensional arrays, but it is much
slower
than blitz++. I have only used boost::ublas for linear algebra (e.g. sparse
matrices)
a
【在 s**i 的大作中提到】
: Are they both necessary for scientific computations with C++?
: It seems to me that lapack++ also has some kind of Matrix and Vector
: definitions
: so what is the advantage of using Blitz++(Or something similar such as Boost,
: MTL) ?
|
s**i
发帖数: 381 | 8 In terms of eigenvalue decomposition, which one is best?
I guess still LAPACK?
),
This is the old version. There has been a new fork since 2000 by other guys:
http://lapackpp.sourceforge.net/html/index.html
【在 s*******g 的大作中提到】
: blitz++ is designed to be a multi-dimensional array library (a very fast one),
: not
: a linear algebra library (such as boost::ublas or lapack++). For instance,
: blitz++
: does not provide sparse matrices. A look at lapack++ website
: http://math.nist.gov/lapack++/
: seems to imply that it is not actively developed (last update in 2000).
: boost::multi_array also provides multi-dimensional arrays, but it is much
: slower
: than blitz++. I have only used boost::ublas for linear algebra (e.g. sparse
|
