[GRASS-PSC] Incubation progress, open issues in Wiki

[Helena Mitasova]

Brad, Soeren

would it be possible to create a list of modules that would be  
affected by this change and then we should do a thorough testing on  
spearfish and nc_sample data set and ask others to test it with their  
data (including all kinds of unusual applications that they may have,  
large data sets, different scales, xy and latlong,etc.), especially  
compare the results run with the current solvers and the new ones.  
You are right that this is a significant and important change so it  
needs a lot of testing to make sure that we don't get unintended  
consequences. I wish we did such comparison and testing before the  
sites->vector points change.

Soeren - could you email to the dev list or at least to PSC the  
comparison of different solver when used with v.surf.rst? (if you  
don't have it on-hand - I can post it - it may be even useful to put  
it on a related wiki page - it is a useful reminder how much  
difference there is for different solvers).

Helena


Helena Mitasova
Dept. of Marine, Earth and Atm. Sciences
1125 Jordan Hall, NCSU Box 8208,
Raleigh NC 27695
http://skagit.meas.ncsu.edu/~helena/



On Sep 4, 2007, at 10:55 PM, Brad Douglas wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-09-04 at 10:05 +0200, Markus Neteler wrote:
>> Hi Arnulf,
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 08:57:39AM +0200, Arnulf Christl wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> I wanted to send a friendly reminder of the open issues in the  
>>> Wiki at:
>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/ 
>>> GRASS_Incubation_Progress#Open_Issues
>>>
>>> As far as I can see activity wrt to the incubation process has  
>>> stopped
>>> altogether, there have been no edits in the Wiki for 3 months. I  
>>> have to
>>> report to the Incubation Committee in my function as mentor and  
>>> they will
>>> again ask why incubation has stopped. What shall I tell them?
>>
>> that it didn't stop :) Indeed, we didn't update the Wiki as we
>> should. But currently we are replacing remaining "Numerical  
>> Receipes in C"
>> code with new functions.
>
> BTW, I located more NR code in GRASS.  The eigen and Jacobi  
> routines use
> them.  I've also discovered that the NR routines are inherently
> unstable, but that also applies to most OSS solutions.
>
> Both Soren and myself would like to replace the BLAS/LAPACK (Fortran
> code) libraries with ATLAS, a tuned C version.  This also gets us away
> from the Fortran issues suffered by gcc4.
>
> If there are no objections, I would like to go ahead and modify
> configure.in and include/ to reflect this.  Soren has already  
> created a
> good wrapper API for the functionality and has expanded it  
> extensively.
> I didn't note any objections when I queried the devel list, but I  
> think
> this is sufficiently large enough to be voted on by the PSC.
>
> I really can't complete my imagery/ and lib/gmath API changes until
> ATLAS (or some equivalent..maybe even GSL?) has replaced existing
> BLAS/LAPACK.
>
>> Some file headers may need update, too, as above page indicates.
>
> I've been adding them to all files I've touched...and I've touched  
> quite
> a few lately.
>
>>> I did hope that we might get GRASS through before FOSS4G. Any  
>>> chance? There
>>> is really not much left to do.
>>
>> That would be an excellent milestone.
>
> Agreed.
>
>
> -- 
> 73, de Brad KB8UYR/6 <rez touchofmadness com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> grass-psc mailing list
> grass-psc at grass.itc.it
> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc