 |
Forums |
Admin  Start New Thread
By: Tim Breitkreutz
 RE: Some Questions [ reply ]
2006-03-25 21:08
|
Good discussion--
I think crunching every bit and Hz out of a calculation isn't as important as it was 10 or 20 years ago. As long as the algorithms are not sub-optimal, I think native Ruby could cut it for most purposes.
More importantly, though, is that the GSL is licensed under GPL, which means it can't be easily released with proprietary software. I believe the Ruby License would give people more freedom to use different revenue models for software development involving RSL.
More information on GSL vs looser licenses here: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html
|
By: Stefano Taschini
RE: Some Questions [ reply ]
2006-03-25 16:09
|
Well, not all numerical computations have to be necessarily huge. For many smallish problems, which I have the feeling are in fact the majority, native ruby should be enough.
If you are dealing with large problems you shoudn't even consider ruby as a framework and head straight to numerical work horses or to dedicated software packages.
|
By: Aditya Mahajan
RE: Some Questions [ reply ]
2006-03-25 00:56
|
Do you really want to do it in native Ruby? Won't that be too slow for numerical computations.
How will be it differ from from what GSL interface already provide? (Other than the fact that is a pain to install).
|
By: Tim Breitkreutz
RE: Welcome to Open-Discussion [ reply ]
2006-03-17 17:19
|
Hi all.
The purpose of RSL is to provide a single place for people to contribute their numerical implementations. I started this because I was looking for an implemented linear least-squares fit algorithm (applying the DRY principle--don't repeat yourself). Since I couldn't find one anywhere in native Ruby, I put it together myself, and will be contributing it to this project.
|
|
|
