Re: Update roll-up on my arsd libraries
On Friday, 14 April 2017 at 19:55:54 UTC, Jerry wrote: You have mixed spaces and tabs, not in the good way either. https://github.com/adamdruppe/arsd/blob/master/simpledisplay.d#L3642 Some code is copied from C headers, some come from open source contributors who may use different styles than I do. I accept these gifts in the spirit in which they are given. If I edit that code, I might reformat it, but it isn't important to me.
Re: Update roll-up on my arsd libraries
You have mixed spaces and tabs, not in the good way either. https://github.com/adamdruppe/arsd/blob/master/simpledisplay.d#L3642
Re: BLAS implementation for D
On Friday, 14 April 2017 at 16:31:24 UTC, jmh530 wrote: Not a lawyer, but I think if you just port it to another language it is a derived work in GPL and the ported project must also be GPL. This is correct. However, if you're completely re-writing each function, I don't know. I don't think that argument would apply in this case. It would be necessary to start a new project to give it an alternative license.
Re: BLAS implementation for D
On Friday, 14 April 2017 at 16:31:24 UTC, jmh530 wrote: On Friday, 14 April 2017 at 15:37:20 UTC, data pulverizer wrote: You raise a very good point. My intention is to completely re-write each function that was based on GSL's CBLAS while upgrading the performance. Once this is done the library should be regarded as a different work ... if anyone knows more about how licenses work and can shed more light on this approach please comment. I would not want people to avoid using it in the future because of the license status. Not a lawyer, but I think if you just port it to another language it is a derived work in GPL and the ported project must also be GPL. However, if you're completely re-writing each function, I don't know. Companies that do this would have one team look at every function and write some specs for it and have another group write it without reference to the original. Thank you for the information ... looks like I need to talk to a friendly lawyer to know for sure - if the term "friendly lawyer" is not an oxymoron :-)
Re: Article: Interfacing D with C and Fortran
On Thursday, 13 April 2017 at 11:23:32 UTC, jmh530 wrote: Looks good. Also, I tried to add the blog to feedly, but it wasn't having any of it. You might want to create an RSS feed for it. Just an FYI, I was looking at another post http://www.active-analytics.com/blog/fitting-glm-with-large-datasets/ and the top part is a little confusing because the code below switches it up to do CC=BB*AA instead of CC=AA*BB. If I'm understanding it correctly, you originally have an mXn matrix times an nXp matrix, then you partition the left hand side to be mXk and the right hand to kXp and loop through and add them up. However, at the top you say that A (which at the top is the left hand variable) is split up by rows. However, the code clearly splits the left hand side (B here) by columns (BB is 5X100 and B is a 10-dimensional list of 5X10 matrices).
Re: BLAS implementation for D
On Friday, 14 April 2017 at 15:37:20 UTC, data pulverizer wrote: You raise a very good point. My intention is to completely re-write each function that was based on GSL's CBLAS while upgrading the performance. Once this is done the library should be regarded as a different work ... if anyone knows more about how licenses work and can shed more light on this approach please comment. I would not want people to avoid using it in the future because of the license status. Not a lawyer, but I think if you just port it to another language it is a derived work in GPL and the ported project must also be GPL. However, if you're completely re-writing each function, I don't know. Companies that do this would have one team look at every function and write some specs for it and have another group write it without reference to the original.
Re: BLAS implementation for D
On Thursday, 13 April 2017 at 17:43:14 UTC, Bill Baxter wrote: Re: merging with Mir GLAS, that seems very tricky without changing Mir GLAS's license to GPL. You raise a very good point. My intention is to completely re-write each function that was based on GSL's CBLAS while upgrading the performance. Once this is done the library should be regarded as a different work ... if anyone knows more about how licenses work and can shed more light on this approach please comment. I would not want people to avoid using it in the future because of the license status.
Boston DLang Meetup Friday 4/21
We will have one more meetup before the conference, hope you can attend! https://www.eventbrite.com/e/monthly-boston-d-get-together-tickets-33731308251 -Steve
Re: Update roll-up on my arsd libraries
On Friday, 14 April 2017 at 06:23:00 UTC, Basile B. wrote: Thanks particularly for this one, which is certainly a reference about how to use the nightmare-ish X11 API in D. I actually don't think X is that bad for what it does. just that it is ridiculously underpowered compared to the competition. If you want a real nightmare, take a look at terminal.d's innards. Eeek.
Re: Update roll-up on my arsd libraries
On Thursday, 13 April 2017 at 16:04:18 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: I haven't posted in announce for a while, so I figured I'd give you guys an update on what's been happening in my libs. This message is a big long, so feel free to just skim to see if you are interested in anything. [...] * simpledisplay.d has gotten a LOT of work lately. Thanks particularly for this one, which is certainly a reference about how to use the nightmare-ish X11 API in D.
