Re: Who uses clapack?

From: James Van Buskirk (not_valid_at_comcast.net)
Date: 12/11/04 

Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 01:50:12 GMT

<beliavsky@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1102727931.346615.98970@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...

> The single precision codes of LAPACK start with the letter S, as
> described at http://www.netlib.org/lapack/individualroutines.html , and
> are thus easy to recognize.

What I would prefer regarding the simgle precision versions would
be a single unified version, with numeric inquiry functions, where
necessary, accounting for the differences. The kind type parameter
in the functions would be inherited from the host module. Another
module could rename the procedures to their single- and double-
precision names and create also generic names. The utility of the
resulting code would be that of C++ templates in that all the code
would be maintained in one place and could be used generically. The
only comparative awkwardness of this approach is the intermediate
module(s) that do the renaming, but I don't think they would be
changed a whole lot in the maintainance phase. I have previously
posted several examples of this technique, but it doesn't seem to
have caught on.

> You have indirectly made a good case for writing the next version of
> LAPACK in Fortran 95.

My reading of the previous post was that the intent was more direct.
But maybe I'm just reading others' posts more optimistically. 

-- 
write(*,*) transfer((/17.392111325966148d0,6.5794487871554595D-85, &
6.0134700243160014d-154/),(/'x'/)); end