(1) The extent of the support for LAPACK. Do we want to stick with LAPACK Lite?
There has been a full LAPACK interface for a long while, of which LAPACK Lite is just the subset that is needed for supporting the high-level routines in the module LinearAlgebra. I seem to have lost the URL to the full version, but it's on my disk, so I can put it onto my FTP server if there is a need.
(2) The storage format. If we've still got row-ordered matrices under the hood, and we want to use native LAPACK libraries that were compiled using column-major format, then we'll have to be careful to set all of the flags correctly. This isn't going to be a big deal, _unless_ NumPy will support more of LAPACK when a native library is available. Then, of course, there
The low-level interface routines don't take care of this. It's the high-level Python code (module LinearAlgebra) that sets the transposition argument correctly. That looks like a good compromise to me.
(3) Through the judicious use of header files with compiler-dependent flags, we could accommodate the various naming conventions used when the FORTRAN libraries were compiled (e.g., sgetrf_ or SGETRF).
That's already done! Konrad. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Konrad Hinsen | E-Mail: hinsen@cnrs-orleans.fr Centre de Biophysique Moleculaire (CNRS) | Tel.: +33-2.38.25.55.69 Rue Charles Sadron | Fax: +33-2.38.63.15.17 45071 Orleans Cedex 2 | Deutsch/Esperanto/English/ France | Nederlands/Francais -------------------------------------------------------------------------------