> We could adopt FLAME, which is a much more general framework, C-based > and faster than LAPACK. I really think this is a better way to go > than LAPACK. Unfortunately it doesn't have so many routines at the > moment.
+1 on the idea. The FLAME developers would probably be willing to fill in the gaps if it meant having FLAME underneath GSL 2.0. They're nice folks, and they love displacing LAPACK. - Rhys
