On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 1:17 PM, Hongzheng Wang wan...@gmail.com wrote:
Frankly, you have slowly drifted off the subject since your previous
post.
With the benefit of hindsight, perhaps yes. My intention is not to
troll at all (even for things that may or may not be better), so
please bear with me.
For the original question, my personal opinion on this subject is that
just build the program in C++ with some favorite style and narrow the
interface between the C++ part and GSL facilities. By contrast,
wrapping GSL is not an easy choice because GSL utilizes so many
classic C style coding tricks, e.g., void* pointer conversion etc.
Specifically, for vector/matrix support library, a third part one out
of GSL can be used, because most parts of GSL facilities can work well
with built-in array (which are widely supported in other vector/matrix
libraries) and do not rely on specific GSL vector/matrix interfaces.
But that still begs the question. Why would you want to use GSL's
linear algebra subset? GSL's comprehensive coverage makes it a
valuable tool for many tasks. I for one, mix it's histogram routines
with some operations from eigen trivially.
Considering that there is some community interest in writing C++ish
wrappers to GSL, I want to know what motivates such need? I mean why
invest effort here, when it is possible to take something that,
atleast appears to be, is better? Is there a particular reason/benefit
to investing effort in writing GSL's C++ bindings over simply using
eigen?
I might be missing something here, but is the interest in writing c++
wrappers is for just the linear algebra subset or for the whole GSL?
Full GSL c++ wrappers would be a good idea, I agree. I am not so
enthused about wrappers for just the linear algebra subset.
--
Rohit Garg
http://rpg-314.blogspot.com/
Senior Undergraduate
Department of Physics
Indian Institute of Technology
Bombay
___
Help-gsl mailing list
Help-gsl@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gsl
