Hey group, I got the following message a while back: Hello Eric, I was just told that SciPy includes a package of mine, ODEPACK, within Python wrappers, and that the source of ODEPACK was Netlib. I am delighted to hear this, but concerned about the version used. I recently did a major upgrade to ODEPACK, with enhancements to both the capabilities and portability. The current version is available from a website here, http://www.llnl.gov/CASC/download/download_home.html (along with other ODE solvers of possible interest to SciPy users). -Alan Hindmarsh Are we using this version of ODEPACK, or an older one? If we're using an older one, do you think we should upgrade before trying to release 0.2.0? Will anyone volunteer to check into this and also what is involved with the upgrade (if needed). I'm inclined to but Pearu's fftpack2 in as fftpack for the new version if it passes muster (looks like it is going to), so I'm happy to make this upgrade also if you think it would go smoothly. Thanks, eric
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 05:26:14AM -0500, eric jones wrote: [snip]
Are we using this version of ODEPACK, or an older one?
The old one.
If we're using an older one, do you think we should upgrade before trying to release 0.2.0? Will anyone volunteer to check into this and also what is involved with the upgrade (if needed).
I'm not an expert on the package, but it looks like the only routine SciPy uses (LSODA) has only changed its name to DLSODA. The call arguments appear to be the same. Ditto with error messages. Then all you have to do is update the name __odrpack.h and fiddle with the build procedure. -- Robert Kern Ruddock House President kern@caltech.edu "In the fields of hell where the grass grows high Are the graves of dreams allowed to die." -- Richard Harter
-----Original Message----- From: scipy-dev-admin@scipy.net [mailto:scipy-dev-admin@scipy.net] On Behalf Of Robert Kern Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 12:28 PM To: scipy-dev@scipy.net Subject: Re: [SciPy-dev] Are we using the latest ODEPACK?
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 05:26:14AM -0500, eric jones wrote:
[snip]
Are we using this version of ODEPACK, or an older one?
The old one.
If we're using an older one, do you think we should upgrade before trying to release 0.2.0? Will anyone volunteer to check into this and also what is involved with the upgrade (if needed).
I'm not an expert on the package, but it looks like the only routine SciPy uses (LSODA) has only changed its name to DLSODA. The call arguments appear to be the same. Ditto with error messages. Then all you have to do is update the name __odrpack.h and fiddle with the build procedure.
Hey Robert, Thanks for looking into this. It sounds like the update won't be to bad. Based on Pearu's comments, we'll wait to do this when he has a chance to write f2py wrappers for it. eric
-- Robert Kern Ruddock House President kern@caltech.edu
"In the fields of hell where the grass grows high Are the graves of dreams allowed to die." -- Richard Harter _______________________________________________ Scipy-dev mailing list Scipy-dev@scipy.net http://www.scipy.net/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, eric jones wrote:
Are we using this version of ODEPACK, or an older one?
The old one.
If we're using an older one, do you think we should upgrade before trying to release 0.2.0?
Actually, I think that the integrate module should be rewritten for using f2py generated interfaces. So, I would suggest postponing this upgrade for the next scipy release. Since I am using quite actively ODE solvers right now and hence I am interested in getting the integrate module improved, documented and tested; I could spend some time with it, but not in the next coming few weeks. Btw, a nice date for 0.2.0 would be the same or soon after when Python 2.2.2 will be released, may be within a week or two. So that Scipy could be tested against Python 2.2.2 before its release. Pearu
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, eric jones wrote:
Are we using this version of ODEPACK, or an older one?
The old one.
If we're using an older one, do you think we should upgrade before trying to release 0.2.0?
Actually, I think that the integrate module should be rewritten for using f2py generated interfaces. So, I would suggest postponing this upgrade for the next scipy release.
OK. F2py generated interfaces sounds like it is a good idea.
Since I am using quite actively ODE solvers right now and hence I am interested in getting the integrate module improved, documented and tested; I could spend some time with it, but not in the next coming
few
weeks.
All very good things.
Btw, a nice date for 0.2.0 would be the same or soon after when Python 2.2.2 will be released, may be within a week or two. So that Scipy
could
be tested against Python 2.2.2 before its release.
I think this is doable. I continue to spend all my available programming time on weave. However, the end is in sight for this -- perhaps 2 more nights of work. After that, I will focus on the release. We are dang close to having a usable bug tracker (Round-Up) running. It actually works now, but we have a few kinks to work out before we turn everyone loose on it. Hopefully it will be up by Thursday and we can use it to manage the release process in a semi-organized way. eric
participants (3)
-
eric jones -
Pearu Peterson -
Robert Kern