Subject: Mutuals : sparse vs banded

From: [email-masked] (Christopher E. Reid)
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 94 16:31:43 -0500

Eric,

Ok, you are right about the comparison between storage requirements
of a "sparse" versus a "banded" approach for parts with pins arranged
as you indicated. One could argue about how many such parts there are
and therefore which approach actually results in a shorter
"average" description over a large number of parts. However,
that discussion is probably pointless.

What is important is convenience to the supplier and user.
The banded-matrix approach is convenient because field solvers
tend to deliver their results that way. The "sparse" method is
(in some cases) easier to read.

We might consider supporting both methods, since the focus is
on convenience, and each method is better in certain cases.

Chris