Exciting thought, but I'd lean towards a separate package. In any case "parallelization of GSL" is kind of a loaded term. It's not clear to me that many of the routines presented in GSL are easily "parallelizable" per se?
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 2:46 PM, Jochen Küpper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I was wondering whether there are any plans for the parallelization of GSL? > > For example, I found this article on "Parallelization of GSL: Architecture, > Interfaces, and Programming Models" form 2004: > > https://commerce.metapress.com/content/jtp50vjc1e3gwane/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf&sid=medqeqrui2yyng45okahx345&sh=www.springerlink.com > > I also found a message by Brian Gough from 2002 stating that it would not > fit the design of GSL (Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>). > > Would there be any objections if one started to a few include OpenMP > directives in the code? They would not at all interfere with normal usage of > GSL in single-threaded calculations. If they should even be optional for the > use of GSL in OpenMP calculations, they could be flagged by a run-time or > compile-time (preferred for performance) switch. > > Thoughts? > > Greetings, > Jochen > -- > Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit > http://www.Jochen-Kuepper.de > Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité GnuPG key: CC1B0B4D > Sex, drugs and rock-n-roll > > >
