On May 23, 2007, at 3:41 PM, R. Edwin Garcia wrote:
It would be very strange to demand to use mpirun to run in a single
processor. In C and other Python implemetations, if you do not use
mpirun when you run your application the program runs as a single
processor machine (if the program is well written, of course).
I am unable to see the point of using PETSc, when there are other
libraries that do the same thing (and with a much cleaner and
clearer API). If you simply want the solvers, why not use Roldan
Pozos' templated Krylov solvers?
I don't think that has much over pysparse. We could take extra
functionality from Roland's code and plaster it into
pysparse. The chebshev routine would be one that is useful. That
would probably be the most expedient way to
get additional functionality since pysparse integration with python
and installation is so seamless.
Am I correct in saying that ignoring parallel, petsc has quite a bit
of additional functionality over iml? I am thinking
more about algebraic and multilevel solvers.
Actually, adding additional functionality into pysparse may be a more
expedient method than expecting others to build
these great, beastly packages. This is something that Max can help us
determine over the summer.
http://math.nist.gov/iml++/
They are a very elegant set of libraries.
Cheers,
Edwin
--
Daniel Wheeler
