search

Fortran-FOSS-Programmers / Fortran-FOSS-Programmers.github.io

Fortran FOSS Programmers community homepage
Fortran-FOSS-Programmers.github.io/mission
Other
5 stars 1 forks source link

Members page #5

Closed szaghi closed 2 years ago

szaghi commented 8 years ago

Dear all,

I have added a skeleton page for Members list. For few of us ( @jacobwilliams @cmacmackin @aamaricci ) I have added some data (please check for correctness) as an example of layout. In particular, I like to highlight our projects developed outside the group, but related to Fortran. I hope you agree.

If you like this layout, I can add in the future the data of all us, but very slow: I much prefer that each of us takes care of his/her own placeholder, but I can serve as plane B.

I hope to improve other pages soon.

My best regards.

victorsndvg commented 8 years ago

Good work @szaghi !

zbeekman commented 8 years ago

Looks Good to Me!

szaghi commented 8 years ago

Ok, I will wait for @cmacmackin and @jacobwilliams and @aamaricci approvals before merge this.

aamaricci commented 8 years ago

looks ok to me. Thanks Stefano!

Cheers, A

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:13 PM Stefano Zaghi notifications@github.com wrote:

Ok, I will wait for @cmacmackin https://github.com/cmacmackin and @jacobwilliams https://github.com/jacobwilliams and @aamaricci https://github.com/aamaricci approvals before merge this.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Fortran-FOSS-Programmers/Fortran-FOSS-Programmers.github.io/pull/5#issuecomment-220616732

cmacmackin commented 8 years ago

If you don't mind, could you remove futility from the list of my projects. I've never really developed it into anything useful. Other than that, looks good.

szaghi commented 8 years ago

@cmacmackin sure, no problem. I am waiting for @jacobwilliams modifications, then I will remove futility (that, indeed, I like :smile: ).

@aamaricci thank you for your feedback.

cmacmackin commented 8 years ago

@szaghi I'm still quite pleased with the name, but most of the things I had thought I'd put in there have been done by other people already and likely better than I would do them.

aamaricci commented 8 years ago

@Chris: actually I like futility a lot. I thought many times that we should somehow merge SciFortran and futility (and possibly the other collections of Fortran routines) in a single larger project. In my view rather than having many different and specific prjects, it would be much more useful (but also much more work) to have a single large package. Anyway, it can be that my view is wrong or biased :-) A

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:49 PM Chris MacMackin notifications@github.com wrote:

@szaghi https://github.com/szaghi I'm still quite pleased with the name, but most of the things I had thought I'd put in there have been done by other people already and likely better than I would do them.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Fortran-FOSS-Programmers/Fortran-FOSS-Programmers.github.io/pull/5#issuecomment-220626851

cmacmackin commented 8 years ago

@aamaricci I think having a single project incorporating many of the existing utilities and mathematical routines is a good idea. I would be happy for it to use the name futility. I just don't know that anything which I have in that repository at the moment is good enough to make the cut.

szaghi commented 8 years ago

@aamaricci @cmacmackin my dear, indeed I am here somehow not streamlined with you: I prefer thiny codes (library/app) tailored to few goals and doing those at their best rather huge collections aggregating not-so-related stuffs. This is not the case of SciFortran, that collects many tiny goals but high-related to scientific computations as well Chris' futility that is a little more general.

In general, I now prefer the KISS phylosophy, Keep It Simple and Stupid: this helps me to develop and maintain the tiny codes.

Cheers.

aamaricci commented 8 years ago

Eheh. These are different strategies that work for different things.

I adopt a kiss philosophy for minor and more specific projects, but on the other hand while coding (something that I started relatively late in my life) I realized that fortran, even being very much scientific oriented language, lacks of a serious, complete scientific framework.

I am thinking here at something like scipy/numpy for python, GSL for C and so on. Something the new or inexperienced user can use easily to perform basic tasks. This will allow to focus better on more specific problems without having to reinvent the wheel every time.

Imagine that as you now use matmul rather than a nested do loop, tomorrow you could use inv, eigh, etc... rather than a complicated call to lapack routines.

This is what led me to organize some of the code I wrote or I found on-line in SciFortran: 1 installation, 1 dependence, 1 library access to (almost) all needed software.

Then much has to be done yet, but this is a first step.

Cheers A

Il Sab 21 Mag 2016, 07:59 Stefano Zaghi notifications@github.com ha scritto:

@aamaricci https://github.com/aamaricci @cmacmackin https://github.com/cmacmackin my dear, indeed I am here somehow not streamlined with you: I prefer thiny codes (library/app) tailored to few goals and doing those at their best rather huge collections aggregating not-so-related stuffs. This is not the case of SciFortran, that collects many tiny goals but high-related to scientific computations as well Chris' futility that is a little more general.

In general, I now prefer the KISS phylosophy, Keep It Simple and Stupid: this helps me to develop and maintain the tiny codes.

Cheers.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/Fortran-FOSS-Programmers/Fortran-FOSS-Programmers.github.io/pull/5#issuecomment-220760781

jacobwilliams commented 8 years ago

Looks good to me!