[SciPy-Dev] Bundling Boost?
Charles R Harris
Sun Oct 7 12:18:50 CDT 2012
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Pauli Virtanen <email@example.com> wrote:
> 07.10.2012 19:21, Charles R Harris kirjoitti:
> > I think using the boost library is a good idea. It is well tested and
> > looks to support quad precision, something we will probably want at some
> > point. It also looks to be highly templated and tightly integrated, so I
> > suspect getting it properly interfaced might be non-trivial. The same
> > holds for the distributions, but we have done much the same. It might be
> > worth looking over the boost classes for some ideas.
> > As to the size of the code, the current scipy/special library is ~40MB
> > and I expect we can get rid of some of that. We should check for LLVM
> > compatibility to make sure Apple isn't a problem, but it looks like most
> > other C++ compilers will work, Boost does try hard for universality.
> > Compile times will probably increase if we keep all the templates.
> Integrating it is actually not so hard, it's here if someone wants to
> try (e.g. if it works at all on OSX):
> and you get `scipy.special._ufuncs_cxx.jv`.
A few questions.
Are you using the C compatibility option for boost?
How are you dealing with errors?
Any support for complex numbers?
I think it is a plus that Boost supports floats, doubles, and long doubles
in the C compatibility mode. I don't know if we will also need complex for
some of the functions.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the SciPy-Dev