DIP80: phobos additions

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 15 June 2015 at 08:12:17 UTC, anonymous wrote:
> sorry, I should read more careful. I understand 'optimize 
> default implementation to the speed of high quality BLAS for 
> _any_/large matrix size'. Great if it is done but imo there is 
> no real pressure to do it and probably needs lot of time of 
> experts.
>
> To benchmark when existing BLAS is actually faster is than 
> 'naive brute force' sounds very good and reasonable.

Yes. Well, I think there are some different expectations to what 
a standard library should include. In my view BLAS is primarily 
an API that matters because people have existing code bases, 
therefore it is common to have good implementations for it. I 
don't really see any reason for why new programs should target it.

I think it is a good idea to stay higher level. Provide simple 
implementations that the optimizer can deal with. Then have a 
benchmarking program that run on different configurations 
(os+hardware) to measure when the non-D libraries perform better 
and use those when they are faster.

So I don't think phobos should provide BLAS as such. That's what 
I would do, anyway.