On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, Craig DeForest wrote:
> I've been meaning to overhaul the internal FFT code for a long time,
[...]
>
> What's the consensus on how to overhaul FFT'ing? I am hesitant to
> ditch the internal FFT code entirely, because it's nice to have an
> internal fallback from the rather nice FFTW library (and hence avoid
> yet another dependency for basic operations like convolution).
This isn't going to be consensus opinion, but I think complex numbers
are pretty important to useful FFT code. You told me:
CD> PDL::Complex was never fully implemented, in the sense of
CD> overloading all the basic operators. Hence many operations will
CD> "fall through" to the PDL implementation that is under the hood.
slightly reformatted.
See the thread starting
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Maybe there's nothing that can be done to simplify this, but I thought
It raise it given the opportunity.
Hugh
_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
