uBLAS past, present, and future.
Hello, I am trying to better understand the current status of the uBLAS library. Below I have listed a few questions. Of course, any responses are completely off the record. We just need to get a better idea of the current state of uBLAS. Thank you, in advance, for any information you provide. - What is the history of uBLAS? What is the eventual goal? - What is the current status of uBLAS? How complete is it currently? Anything left unimplemented (Sparse stuff)? Should a project which relies upon uBLAS heavily *expect* to encounter bugs within uBLAS? - Is uBLAS expected to become a part of the C++ standard? - What advantages/disadvantages do you feel uBLAS has when compared to FORTRAN. Could it replace FORTRAN? Thank you to everyone for your time and effort on all BOOST libraries and for your answers. Sincerely, Dan Elliott
Daniel L Elliott wrote:
I am trying to better understand the current status of the uBLAS library. Below I have listed a few questions. Of course, any responses are completely off the record. We just need to get a better idea of the current state of uBLAS. Thank you, in advance, for any information you provide.
I don't have the answers to these questions, but to be honest, I wish that every library in Boost had answers to all of these questions up in front on the main page of their documentation. These are very important peices of information, and misunderstandings with regards to these issues in general has created a lot of problems in the past. Sometimes, it would just be nice to have an honest indication of project vitality. Aaron W. LaFramboise
G'day all. Looks like the uBLAS questions are going here, since we can't post to the proper list. So might as well ask here. I'm on a 32-bit platform, and I can't create a sparse matrix of dimensions 65536*65536. I get a run-time assertion failure, because uBLAS requires that for an m by n matrix, m*n fits in a machine word. For a dense matrix, that's an understandable limitation, but for a sparse matrix it's impractically small. I'm trying to use uBLAS to solve finite element Poisson problems with odd boundary conditions, which involves solving a ver sparse linear system with the grid points as unknowns. This limitation means I can't use anything larger than a 40*40*40 voxel grid. Any thoughts? Cheers, Andrew Bromage
ajb@spamcop.net wrote:
G'day all.
Looks like the uBLAS questions are going here, since we can't post to the proper list. So might as well ask here.
I'm on a 32-bit platform, and I can't create a sparse matrix of dimensions 65536*65536. I get a run-time assertion failure, because uBLAS requires that for an m by n matrix, m*n fits in a machine word.
For a dense matrix, that's an understandable limitation, but for a sparse matrix it's impractically small.
I'm trying to use uBLAS to solve finite element Poisson problems with odd boundary conditions, which involves solving a ver sparse linear system with the grid points as unknowns. This limitation means I can't use anything larger than a 40*40*40 voxel grid.
Any thoughts?
I believe that this limitation has been removed in the to-be-released-imminently 1.32 version. See http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.ublas:1460 which talks of a 1000000x1000000 matrix. To answer the original poster, the Ublas mailing list can be browsed here. I'd say that there are 4 or 5 active developers ATM. http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.boost.ublas Regards, Angus
G'day. Quoting Angus Leeming <angus.leeming@btopenworld.com>:
I believe that this limitation has been removed in the to-be-released-imminently 1.32 version.
Excellent! Guess I can wait a little while. Thanks for the help. Cheers, Andrew Bromage
participants (1)
-
Aaron W. LaFramboise -
ajb＠spamcop.net -
Angus Leeming -
Daniel L Elliott