Re: Status of development /Benchmarks

Hi David,

Thanks for the fast reply. There might be a misunderstanding: I don't 
have any code here that is ready for uBLAS. The story goes back to 
approximately spring where it was decided to improve uBLAS. I decided to 
part ways because of our differences in how uBLAS should look like (and 
since it is your library it is of course your right to choose!). So I 
rewrote the whole thing (or better: the parts that i needed, that is 
dense and sparse algebra, no banded matrices) and now got a 16000 LOC 
subset of uBLAS with most of the functionality (and sometimes more) and 
automatic ATLAS bindings for fast_prod etc.

Now i wanted to come back and compare the different approaches and see 
whether I could adopt some of your changes as well as maybe port some of 
my code back to uBLAS.

So once most of the new features are there, i would be happy to compare! 
You would also get a direct benchmark against atlas if you like.

My version is unfortunately not standalone yet because of $REASONS. Also 
looking at your changes, i doubt that the libraries are compatible, for 
example because I overloaded op* and op/ for element-wise operations ( I 
need them so often, element_prod and element_div just does not cut it...)

But if you like you can have a look at it here

(most of ublas functionality minus systems of equations and algorithms)
http://sourceforge.net/p/shark-project/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/Shark/include/shark/LinAlg/BLAS/

(and systems solver + algorithms (wip))
http://sourceforge.net/p/shark-project/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/Shark/include/shark/LinAlg/

Best  Regards,
Oswin

On 29.11.2013 12:40, David Bellot wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the latest version is indeed on github. We didn't commit many things 
> this year so far. We are talking (slowly, I must admit, please blame 
> me not the others) about new features and changes:
>
> (1) integrating GSOC 2013 in the main branch
> (2) removing the vector object to replace it by a new one that will be 
> a matrix and therefore implement a real row of column vector
> (3) Matrix multiplication with operator* valid for all standard 
> operation (vector, matrix, etc...). It is related to (2)
> (4) Algorithms infrastructure (so that we can have real useful features)
> (5) Matrix/vector views for interoperability <- I think this is ultra 
> critical because now ublas is monolithic in the sense that you have to 
> use it everywhere you manipulate data. This would really help into 
> letting people for example have a list of vectors (they are plotting) 
> and ublas working on top of that to do for example transformations
> (6) NEW DOCUMENTATION - examples and the rest. The current one is ... old
> (7) Incorporate some critical bindings (i.e. mumps bindings which is 
> currently probably the most efficient smp and distributed open source 
> linalg solver)
> (8) Matlab binding? Matlab I/O etc... Well same thing with R, csv 
> files, etc... Bindings and I/O in general are pretty poor
> (9) Distributed ublas (GSOC'13)
>
>
> I'm really interested seeing your benchmark. Maybe you can join the 
> github ublas project as well. If you give me your github id I can 
> associate it with the project and you can push your code. Practically 
> speaking, there is a ublas project on github which is a copy a the 
> main boostorg/ublas project. And there are many branches for each 
> project that people can use.
>
> Links you can be interested in:
> https://github.com/uBLAS/ublas/wiki
>
> The workflow that we will follow (as also suggested in boost mailing 
> list) is: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
> with the difference that we have two "masters" i.e. one in 
> ublas_develop (which is our working master) and one that will be 
> always in sync with the latest boost release.
>
> And last but not least, there are a few changes for supporting IDE. In 
> fact, that would be good if people can contribute more. I'm a vi user 
> only, so I need others' skills for that. QTCreator is on its way. 
> Ideally, if we can have some sort of support for the main IDE, on top 
> of my mind: Eclipse, Netbeans, Visual Studio, Anjuta, KDevelop, etc...
>
> Best regards,
> David
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:04 AM, oswin krause 
> <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     I am interested in the current development status of the library.
>     is there the possibility to get the latest version somewhere? I
>     tried to find a working branch on
>     https://github.com/boostorg/ublas but could only find changes
>     older than half a year.
>
>     I am interested in Benchmarking the "new" ublas against "my"
>     reimplemented subset (think about my personal summer of code :) )
>
>     Greetings,
>     Oswin
>     _______________________________________________
>     ublas mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ublas
>     Sent to: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ublas mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ublas
> Sent to: [email protected]