On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Edouard A. <edouard@fausse.info> wrote:
I'm questioning the degree of assurance required for a new algorithm to be unleashed on the unsuspecting masses.
Exactly the point I was trying to make.
So we agree violently then. ;-)
To be more precise the novelty of an algorithm shouldn't be held against it.
If you define "reasonable assurance" to exclude any algorithm that has not been published in a reputable journal, with at least 2 citations, is it still novel? ;-) Just kidding, WRT the novelty bit.
What matters is that a reasonable degree of assurance regarding correctness and performance can be given. This concerns the library as a whole, not just whatever algorithm(s) it may use.
So how do we define "reasonable degree of assurance"? Jon