Re: improved matrix_type check

[David Bateman]

Jaroslav Hajek wrote:
> I didn't mean my question as asking for them. I guessed that part of
> the reason was the fact that UMFPack et al. doesn't support single
> precision, so the linear algebra stuff would have to be done via
> conversion anyway. OTOH, single precision support available for BLAS,
> LAPACK, FFTW and libraries in libcruft.
>   
Yes that is one of the major pains of trying to port single precision
types to sparse matrices/

>> It seems to me that float sparse matrices are
>> probably more useful than float matrices.
>>     
>
> Why?
>   
If you are using sparse matrices, one of your concerns is that you don't
have enough memory to store the dense version of the matrix... So having
single precision would allow a matrix size roughly sqrt(2) large at the
same density without having to use specialized out-of-core techniques.

Regards
David


-- 
David Bateman                                address@hidden
Motorola Labs - Paris                        +33 1 69 35 48 04 (Ph) 
Parc Les Algorithmes, Commune de St Aubin    +33 6 72 01 06 33 (Mob) 
91193 Gif-Sur-Yvette FRANCE                  +33 1 69 35 77 01 (Fax) 

The information contained in this communication has been classified as: 

[x] General Business Information 
[ ] Motorola Internal Use Only 
[ ] Motorola Confidential Proprietary