Jeff Mitchell wrote:

>The first is fragmentation of efforts in ruby.  If someone wants to
>publish fast Fourier transforms or iterative methods, he or she should
>be able to pull from a common library.  For example it's essential to
>have a common complex number class written in C.
>
>  
>
My work may be based on NARRAY's API,but I have not
read your code yet.I found some of your words in linalg's
README file:
-----------------------
The other issue is +narray+.  After a short trial, I decided it wastoo 
difficult to retrofit +linalg+ into +narray+.  There are also 
irreconcilable stylistic differences between +linalg+ and +narray+.

But +linalg+ does not directly compete with +narray+.  +linalg+ is 
fordoing numerical analysis and is rather isolated from the rest of 
ruby.Where +linalg+ has only four matrix types, +narray+ has several 
more(including generic ruby objects) and plays well with other ruby 
packages.
---------------------------
But maybe We need a more robust base to develop more.Consider
the advantage of Ruby in numerical analysis,a isolated method
package may be not the best one,since we need it to interact
with other packages(Matlab) or languages(FORTRAN) most of the time.

Maybe it's the time to have a fundemental module designed for Ruby 
especially.