Talk:List of numerical libraries

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Onoz, the IML link goes to the wrong page

But the right page does not exist.74.185.249.234 (talk) 02:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Boost As A Numerical Library

I am curious about why the C++ library Boost is not included as a numerical library. It certainly offers a plethora of useful numerical algorithms that is comparable to GSL (see here). If no one can offer a reason not to include Boost, I will add it to the list. --BBUCommander (talk) 01:23, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about this also. The only reason I could think of NOT to include it, would be that the number of special functions it supports is relatively small(albeit well chosen). The statistics library seems to provide a fairly complete package of univariate distributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.11.114.158 (talk) 13:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

dnAnalytics is not developed anymore

dnAnalytics will be integrated with Math.Net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.161.42.193 (talk) 04:56, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PAW is not python

PAW is put in the python category. However the wiki page of PAW states that it is an independent skript languange (not python!). Should probably be moved to other. 134.109.68.124 (talk) 07:54, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Separate C and C++ into separate sections

C and C++ are different languages (even though they look and sound similar). Many higher level languages can easily interface with C but not C++. In the interests of using libraries in higher level languages one often looks for C libraries rather than C++. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.68.231 (talk) 06:07, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article Heading Text

The heading text has improved significantly and in theory contains enough information so that people should not be adding external links or items which are not "notable". However, I still think it can be improved. One edit I did that was removed, was an attempted to clarify the meaning of notable. That word is somewhat loaded and means a very different thing to a regular wiki editor and casual people who might be adding links.

By emphasizing that notable might not mean what they think it means, it is hoped that they will pause and think before editing. The second sentence also clarifies that this is not a exhaustive list, but many people, who are casually skimming, won't read that or it won't register. Yes, in an ideal world people would fully read even such a short paragraph and follow highlighted links, but experience says otherwise.

So my proposal is to change "list of notable numerical libraries" to "list of notable (in the Wikipedia sense) numerical libraries".

Pabeles (talk) 10:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We're not supposed to make reference to Wikipedia in articles this way (sounds odd at first, I know). This is because Wikipedia articles are reused on other websites. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Self-references to avoid. - MrOllie (talk) 14:58, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other libraries

Should we mention Apophenia library? --217.21.43.22 (talk) 08:21, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also as far as I know one could use yacas as a library. --217.21.43.22 (talk) 08:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

^^^ Be Bold If someone has issue with either of your additions, they can talk it out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.32.76.97 (talk) 22:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category distinctions

I made changes to the article under the assumption the the language categories are intended to distinguish the libraries based on what language they are written in, not what languages they are used by. Am I mistaken? So, for example, why is the GNU scientific library (GSL), which is written in C, listed under C and C++? Michael9422 (talk) 19:26, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]