GCL, GMP linkage
kraehe at copyleft.de
Thu Dec 18 20:39:19 CET 2003
Moin Richard Fateman,
> >We have a gcl developer (Michael Koehne) working on something similar.
> Michael: I suggest you look at the specs for Allegro's "dumplisp" or
> equivalent, as well as the Lispworks spec.
my elf::save-system is realy simple. It raises a 'dirty' flag and
calls si::save-system. The dirty flag will cause a dlopen of every
library the first time one of my dynamic functions is called. The
current status is 'it works' - but the syntax of defining a dynamic
function is not compatible to defining a static function. So one
idea would be to provide GCL, CLisp's FFI or UFFI look like wrapper
see the elf-loader at http://www.copyleft.de/lisp/
> It is very hard to judge what might be of interest. Some people get very
> excited about finding the bazillionth digit of pi. [...]
> This is OK, we all live in niches of some sort....
my last job was bootstraping the computering department of a fresh
university (www.clamv.iu-bremen.de). I therefore had to talk to a
lot of mathematicans. Most of them use MatLab, Mathematic, Mapple
or SPSS and only a few even know about Octave or Fiasco. None of
them spoke LISP but they tried hard to code MPI in C++ or Fortran.
I tried to convince some to GCL/MPI or other free software and
Computing PI is a good example. Using MPI to compute lisp only
makes sense, if you have numbers larger than IEEE. Else a simple
stochatic process over pytagoras would give its best results
with a few dots and only adds noise to precission afterwards.
So Octave/MPI did'nt gave any benefit over MatLab. But most
mathematics stayed shy of LISP, even if GCL/MPI was able to
compute better numbers.
mailto:kraehe at copyleft.de UNA:+.? 'CED+2+:::Linux:2.4.22'UNZ+1'
http://www.xml-edifact.org/ CETERUM CENSEO WINDOWS ESSE DELENDAM
More information about the gmp-discuss