I use pdl all the time.
I use the ubuntu distros (derived from debian).
I have no opinion on PDLA. The pdl in my current ubuntu ( 1:2.007-5)
fits my needs.
Ed . wrote:
Dear pdl-general list, (had to send again, after subscribing - whoops)
Luis has quite correctly reminded me of this list. I have very recently
revived the question of "whither PDL", and am very interested to get the
thoughts of the wider community. The relevant posting is:
https://sourceforge.net/p/pdl/mailman/message/36638395/ - some explanation
of detail on this crazy "PDLA" thing
(I've checked, and PDLA does in fact still call its executable "pdl" - as
I've said on the thread, that's a bug and I will fix it)
Basically, the question is: do you, dear scientist/PDL user, still use PDL?
Would the increased reproducibility that is easily within reach add value?
(I emphasise reproducibility because a quick scan of the -general list
showed people wanting to patch PDL "proper", which means anyone trying to
reproduce their results would need to also use the patched version, which is
a disaster in my opinion)
Best regards,
Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Luis Mochan
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2019 4:00 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Pdl-devel] Whither PDL?
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 12:45:54AM -0400, Terry Gaetz wrote:
I have been using PDL for more than a decade (or is it two?). Generally,
mere users don't pipe up on pdl-devel...
Maybe more PDL users may be found on pdl-general
_______________________________________________
pdl-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general
