Next in Review Queue? (October 2011)

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 10/29/11 10:24 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> On 10/29/2011 10:59 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> I understand. The way I see it, if SciD can't be considered functional
>> without triangular and symmetric matrices, then we counted an unfinished
>> project as successfully completed. This is an imperfection of our GSoC
>> planning and scrutiny process that we should fix in the future.
>>
>> We shouldn't expect and wait that Cristi will restart work on the
>> project. His future participation would be of course gladly welcome, but
>> we should make nothing contingent upon that.
>>
>> With that in mind, let me ask again: is there someone in the community
>> willing to do what it takes to put SciD through the Phobos review
>> process?
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Andrei
>
> If Cristi never gets around to resuming work on SciD, I'll work on it
> slowly but surely. I agree SciD is unfinished, but this was at least
> partly due to unforeseen things like compiler bugs and the last-minute
> decision to change things over to COW/value semantics and other misc.
> scope creep. IMHO Cristi did a very good job under the circumstances and
> there's no way I could complain/fail him for not finishing
> triangular/symmetric matrices before the GSoC deadline, if that's what
> you're implying. Writing a full scientific lib in a summer is pretty
> ambitious and I'm just glad that we got so far off the ground.

Oh, no question about it. Cristi has done a great job. We all did, 
considering the lack of experience and the constraints. Ideally, we 
would have figured the best corrective actions and features to cut to 
materialize the impact of the project by the end of summer. That impact 
has for now remained in a latent form that needs to be realized.

One great thing you could do at this point is to sketch a roadmap of the 
project from where it is right now to a rounded, deliverable library. 
That way anyone interested would know what steps to take.


Thanks,

Andrei