-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Select which Boost ODE methods to initially support #3
Comments
For reference, the boost Steppers are:
Additionally they have controlled and dense output forms of these. |
Do we plan on requiring Boost or do we want to allow use of other packages such as SUNDIALS... 😅 |
I'm definitely interested in exploring other options. The "choice" of boost so far is an inherited one from prior work, not for any specific reason. I guess we need to learn enough about what options are out there to make an informed choice as to which one is "best" for our project - or if there is a use case for supporting more than one. Some considerations that go along with any potential choices are understanding licensing, minimum supported c++ versions, and perhaps (eventually) benchmarks to see if there is a speed increase. Exploring other underlying integration implementations is could also be a 2.0 task. Maybe we should prioritize getting the project up and running with boost, and then later revisit that choice and evaluate how we might improve it |
I think that sticking to boost at this point is a good call, but I think that we should try to design an abstraction around the integrator. |
That sounds good. The current prototype has some repeated code anyway in that regard for converging events, so a degree of abstraction there would be helpful regardless of what other options we pursue |
@rjpower4 I'm guessing you know a ton more about these options off the cuff than I do, so I'm wondering what insight you may have about them. I currently use Runge-Kutta-Fehlberg 78 exclusively. What sorts of motivations are there for the others? I think maybe, for now, we should have specific reasons for whichever ones we choose to initially support. |
No description provided.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: