Talk:Basic Linear Algebra Subprograms

Should the reference to uBLAS as a BLAS be given a caveat, seeing as it isn't a BLAS implementation but a C++ container class template system?

How about a note for IBM's BLAS tuned for the Cell Processor? Is this important? http://www-03.ibm.com/technology/cell/swlib.html

I created a section with a new heading: Other libraries with Blas functionality. I hope I sorted all the libraries correctly into the two categories.... 16 Feb. 2010. KJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristjan.Jonasson (talk • contribs) 01:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

scalar dot products?

I thought it is either called a scalar product or a dot product; scalar dot product sounds ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.235.154.60 (talk) 07:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with AXPY

Articles about single BLAS functions will likely never rise above the level of WP:HOWTO; this one certainly hasn't. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 13:39, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Covering many subprograms such as AXPY also runs into the problem of creating a reference manual. It is reasonable to have some examples show how different types are handled. Glrx (talk) 22:07, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with General Matrix Multiply

Same reasoning as with the former article AXPY, except this one actually some interesting content that does not violate WP:HOWTO. This content should probably be split between the BLAS article and matrix multiplication (unless there's a specific page on matrix product algorithms?). QVVERTYVS (hm?) 21:37, 22 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge. I don't think the material belongs in matrix multiplication (except for Golub reference) because the viewpoint is BLAS-specific rather than MM in general. The BLAS article should have a link to Matrix multiplication#Communication-avoiding and distributed algorithms. Glrx (talk) 22:59, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not an API?

Glrx removed my remark that BLAS is a de facto standard API for linear algebra. However, I do have the idea that it is: there are many different implementations of BLAS, some based on the reference implementation, some not, all sharing (almost) the same calling sequence and output semantics. Doesn't that constitute an API? (Or maybe two APIs, Fortran BLAS and CBLAS?) QVVERTYVS (hm?) 12:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My edit corrected the use of "function", left the "de facto standard" claim, but removed the term API. BLAS is an interface, and it is a programming interface, but it is not (possibly save the later sparse matrix construction/access routines) intended as an applications programming interface. The 1997 BLAS Quick Reference Guide does not mention API. The 2000 BLAST Forum Standard refers to BLAS as "a specification of a set of kernel routines for linear algebra"; it does not use API even though API was a common term in 2000.

The focus of BLAS is not the applications programmer but rather those programmers who implement numerical libraries for others. LINPACK and LAPACK are APIs; the intention is that applications programmers will directly call the LINPACK and LAPACK interfaces. The text I replaced acknowledges that viewpoint: it claimed that BLAS was "a standard API for linear algebra routines." Routines are not applications, so the statement essentially says BLAS is an API for APIs, a statement that lacks precision.

Google does turn up some hits for BLAS API, but WP is the first hit, and the IBM Software Development Kit for Multicore Acceleration v3.0 Basic Linear Algebra Subprograms Programmer’s Guide and API Reference does not seem to carry much weight (I won't WP:COPYLINK it here). LLL's http://acs.lbl.gov/software/colt/api/cern/colt/matrix/linalg/Blas.html is a hit because BLAS was dumped into an API directory tree for linear algebra; the actual page calls BLAS a set of "High quality 'building block' routines for performing basic vector and matrix operations". Glrx (talk) 17:54, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]