Re: Recommendation for BLAS library

[Rik]

On 03/05/2015 03:52 PM, address@hidden wrote:
> Subject:
> Re: Octave 4.0.0 release candidate 1 available for ftp
> From:
> rocketsound <address@hidden>
> Date:
> 03/05/2015 02:28 PM
> To:
> address@hidden
> List-Post:
> <mailto:address@hidden>
> Content-Transfer-Encoding:
> 7bit
> Precedence:
> list
> MIME-Version:
> 1.0
> References:
> <address@hidden>
> In-Reply-To:
> <address@hidden>
> Message-ID:
> <address@hidden>
> Content-Type:
> text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Message:
> 6
> Just a small QA suggestion that came into my mind while installing the
> Windows version: Add "recommended" in braces behind the BLAS implementation
> that the typicall user should pick; this will avoid some confusion for
> newbies.

All,

Do we have a recommendation for the user?  I seem to recall that OpenBLAS
may be faster, but occasionally has problems with computation while the
reference BLAS is numerically stable.  Does anybody else know more about
the difference between the two?

--Rik