: "bill lam"
> To: "general"
> Sent: Saturday, April 8, 2023 4:03:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] math/lapack2 addon questions
>
> It was I who uploaded them to jsoftware, but I forgot the details.
>
> On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 10:05 PM Raul Miller wrote:
&g
03:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Jgeneral] math/lapack2 addon questions
It was I who uploaded them to jsoftware, but I forgot the details.
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 10:05 PM Raul Miller wrote:
> Hmm...
>
> https://netlib.org/lapack/index.html points me at
> https://icl.utk.edu/lapack-fo
It was I who uploaded them to jsoftware, but I forgot the details.
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 10:05 PM Raul Miller wrote:
> Hmm...
>
> https://netlib.org/lapack/index.html points me at
> https://icl.utk.edu/lapack-for-windows/lapack/ which leads me to
>
Hmm...
https://netlib.org/lapack/index.html points me at
https://icl.utk.edu/lapack-for-windows/lapack/ which leads me to
https://icl.utk.edu/lapack-for-windows/lapack/index.html#libraries
Specifically, for 64 bit, the links
Use the official lapack 3.x from netlib.org, all others are dead ends.
Please also build an optimized blas if possible.
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 9:22 PM Raul Miller wrote:
> Huh... looking at https://netlib.org/liblist.html I see:
>
> *) lapack
>
> *) lapack++ from
Huh... looking at https://netlib.org/liblist.html I see:
*) lapack
*) lapack++ from https://math.nist.gov/lapack++/ superseded by
https://math.nist.gov/tnt/
*) lapack3e upgraded to support features of fortran77 and fortran90
*) lapack90 (404)
*) clapack (lapack after being preprocessed by
Hmm
https://www.fi.muni.cz/~xsvobod2/misc/lapack/ says that no native open
source fortran compiler is available for windows.
But that's an old page, which might be why it ignores
https://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/GFortranBinariesWindows
I'll see if I can get that to work.
Thanks,
--
Raul
On Sat,
Unfortunately the pre-built windows lapack binaries over the net are
outdated.
It is easier to modify the jwiki documentation than to find an updated
binary.
On Fri, Apr 7, 2023 at 8:30 AM Igor Zhuravlov wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 02:30 PM Ric Sherlock wrote:
> > However the new section
On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 02:30 PM Ric Sherlock wrote:
> However the new section about how to identify a LAPACK version doesn't work
> on Windows:
>
> ilaver_jlapack2_ (,0);(,0);(,0)
>
> |domain error in cd, executing dyad 15!:0
> |
> | ilaver_jlapack2_(,0);(,0);(,0)
It turned out that
I was working through instructions on the LAPACK addon page on the wiki.
Works fine on Linux, and mostly on Windows.
However the new section about how to identify a LAPACK version doesn't work
on Windows:
ilaver_jlapack2_ (,0);(,0);(,0)
|domain error in cd, executing dyad 15!:0
|
Any change to improve and simplify the user experience for the
`math/lapack2` addon is welcome from my POV!
On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 3:22 AM chris burke wrote:
> On point 1, it is not necessary that addon code be compatible with
> earlier versions.
>
> You can use RELEASE in the manifest to
On point 1, it is not necessary that addon code be compatible with
earlier versions.
You can use RELEASE in the manifest to specify which releases are
supported. Use j904 or j9.4 to support only the current release, e.g.
RELEASE=: 'j9.4'
If so, the builds for earlier versions will remain
Your contributions are always welcome!
On the point 2, & means no memu applied. The trailing \0 might be absent.
Nevertheless, LAPACK are fortran routines so that C style strings are not
expected.
Therefore I _think_ that is OK.
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 3:55 PM Igor Zhuravlov wrote:
> Dear
Dear addon maintainers,
1. Addon code looks outdated a bit. Is it done intentional to provide addon
compatibility with older JE versions? If not, I'd like to prepare pull request
to update code. No hardcore with multitasking and modifier trains, just a few
nice J9.4 features, plus some
14 matches
Mail list logo
