[SciPy-dev] Dropping djbfft ?

[Nathan Bell]

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:44 PM, Robert Kern <robert.kern at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >> Neither djbfft vs. fftw nor djbfft vs. MKL are definitive comparisons.
>  >> Not everyone can use GPLed code or proprietary code.
>  >
>  > I understand that, I was merely answering to the fact that djbfft is the
>  > fastest. We have fftpack for people who do not care so much about speed,
>  > no ? IOW, I understand there are people who care about speed, people who
>  > care about open source, and people who care about not depending on both
>  > GPL and proprietary code. We support all this, and can still do it
>  > without depending on djbfft. But do we need to satisfy all the
>  > combinations of the above ?
>
>  I'd drop FFTW and MKL support first before djbfft because they are not
>  compatible with the scipy license.

I don't see how this addresses David's argument.

While being the "fastest BSD-compatible FFT for power of 2 problem
sizes" achieves a certain Pareto optimality, wouldn't it be more
productive to provide better support for actively maintained libraries
that are faster and more general?

How large is the djbfft + SciPy user base?

-- 
Nathan Bell wnbell at gmail.com
http://graphics.cs.uiuc.edu/~wnbell/