[GRASS-dev] GRASS inefficiency and FFTW

[stefano de paoli]

Hi Hamish,

> 
> [*] see discussions covering relicensing the GRASS 6
> vector lib under
> the LGPL; some devels would not continue to
> contribute under those
> conditions. (FWIW I wouldn't mind e.g. dglib network
> routing becoming
> LGPL, but some of that is GPL (c) FSF so that's not
> really probable)
> 
> 
> I would encourage you to search the archives for
> threads concerning
> Radim's v.in.dwg vs. Huidae Cho's v.in.dxf port.
> Similar issues apply.


I know quite well these discussions, but
the Numerical Recipes case differs from both the
vector lib case and the v.in.dwg case.

The NR stuff was part of the pre-GPL'ed GRASS, while
the vector lib was almost developed after the GPL
choice (that's why the LGPL discussion). 

The same is valid for v.in.dwg.

>From my point of view it is interesting to observe how
the conflicts between the GPL and the pre-GPL'ed GRASS
code were resolved and what are the results of this
process.   

The question might be "has the GPL choice introduced
somewhere in the GRASS code an inefficiency?"

The NR.FFT Vs FFTW  case seems to introduce an
inefficiency at least in terms of memory usage.

What seems also interesting is that this inefficiency
is well known by the developers, but as such it as not
yet been resolved.


Stefano

> 
> 
> best of luck,
> Hamish
> 



	

	
		
___________________________________ 
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: 
http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html