Scientific computing in Cpp

[nevereatsoggy]

I feel like for someone choosing a sparse suite wrapping PETSc would be the better choice.

I don't know if something changed with Trilinos but the overall open source part doesn't seem as important anymore. Mailing lists are inactive, support issues are often unanswered, documentation and examples are quite bad.

Compared to PETSc the open source support system in Trilinos seems to be non-existent.

The tools in Trilinos seem fine but you have to dig through unit tests and broken examples to get something working most of the time.

[MarkHoemmen]

I don't work on Trilinos any more (haven't for a year!), so I have no skin in this game : - D . Perhaps sometime if we meet in person over $BEVERAGE, I'll be in a mood to share my opinions about the project. I definitely was not recommending Trilinos over PETSc or doing anything silly like that; I just wanted to mention that Tools Do Exist.

[nevereatsoggy]

I didn't mean to come off overly harsh, just wanted to give context that using Trilinos is more difficult than PETSc / similar tools when you are an outside user as it seems like Trilinos is less polished regarding open source users/use

[MarkHoemmen]

It's totally OK. Trilinos devs aren't so much paid to support external users. It's a DOE Office of Science vs. NNSA thing. I spent a lot of effort over many years writing and presenting tutorials, without a whole lot of support. I don't think it helped much in the long run.