From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6140 invoked by alias); 3 Apr 2014 22:07:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 6123 invoked by uid 89); 3 Apr 2014 22:07:44 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-pa0-f47.google.com Received: from mail-pa0-f47.google.com (HELO mail-pa0-f47.google.com) (209.85.220.47) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 22:07:41 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f47.google.com with SMTP id lj1so2470036pab.6 for ; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=EEIj8m1VcpOabg7/bPzrNxyUsBPB6a0AD2QuLWeqHms=; b=mdxHBdsNNUN7mT/3EAv0xkFLf4YCt8aa54jbtaP+DhwE0e5jHGTphVBdsto+4zD5vp 3qVigTxbVHISbrNj7+5/vWwPPWIJHbzrKPkPsN8JeqjKI7KaKZriscfGqj31P59B6z4T 2/pwpCC6qrPWNB5w2LZA6C8Vujw5ntWb5ZfHbJL0Gjk1u6D5KXpU7uLtCO8UIFKlUEZ4 gl3SJJubSrJWNFhUiciS0JVjpYtvrJKTHihbBAfbMgp1iSSotrL74CKZI4GlpbnpPNMu cMVYThu91ubjG3iJawjIm5LalbblYSEn0kANTJ6kSi3Aactxz99Y4poiOgDBgRmmPOCN WShQ== X-Received: by 10.66.250.202 with SMTP id ze10mr10327164pac.153.1396562860032; Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:07:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp-128-189-73-105.ubcsecure.wireless.ubc.ca (dhcp-128-189-73-105.ubcsecure.wireless.ubc.ca. [128.189.73.105]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dn1sm13349123pbb.54.2014.04.03.15.07.38 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:07:39 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) Subject: Re: Steffen interpolation From: =?windows-1252?Q?Jean-Fran=E7ois_Caron?= In-Reply-To: <533DDA3E.30307@colorado.edu> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 22:07:00 -0000 Cc: "gsl-discuss@sourceware.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1212C8BE-D903-42F6-88BD-610F6A115725@phas.ubc.ca> References: <57ABFACA-CA7C-439D-9695-F136F0142156@phas.ubc.ca> <8EA5CA7B-E4C4-48A0-A9EB-BA77F3F1AC11@phas.ubc.ca> <532B23E3.7050700@colorado.edu> <532B2ACF.1060608@colorado.edu> <532B2D8E.8090902@colorado.edu> <532B33B2.6060903@colorado.edu> ,<39D96706-0826-4235-9634-18EE4B97EDB4@phas.ubc.ca> <93B0BFDB4CD56A40BBAE7FB8D8984BF701211E565EBB@EXC4.ad.colorado.edu> <0065F39F-DA69-4394-BA53-E9E9CE163583@phas.ubc.ca> <5339D20F.9030609@colorado.edu> <5339EB15.50803@colorado.edu> <958F2963-D3D1-4BC0-8081-EB56644E3AEE@phas.ubc.ca> <533DD7E5.7090900@colorado.edu> <6878829B-EB42-4C43-BC6D-4E7BB08FC833@phas.ubc.ca> <533DDA3E.30307@colorado.edu> To: Patrick Alken X-SW-Source: 2014-q2/txt/msg00003.txt.bz2 Cool, do you have a general idea of when these changes will make it into an= official release?=20=20 I=92m interested in adding code to the C++ library ROOT that interfaces wit= h GSL, so I=92d like to know the time frame (weeks, months, next year?) Jean-Fran=E7ois On Apr 3, 2014, at 15:01 , Patrick Alken wrote: > I merged the steffen code into the master branch and updated the NEWS file >=20 > Patrick >=20 > On 04/03/2014 03:53 PM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >> Looks good to me. >>=20 >> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>=20 >> On Apr 3, 2014, at 14:51 , Patrick Alken wr= ote: >>=20 >>> Ok I used your new text and modified it slightly to say that the method= uses piecewise cubic polynomials in each interval: >>>=20 >>> ---- >>> Steffen's method guarantees the monotonicity of the interpolating funct= ion >>> between the given data points. Therefore, minima and maxima can only oc= cur >>> exactly at the data points, and there can never be spurious oscillations >>> between data points. The interpolated function is piecewise cubic >>> in each interval. The resulting curve and its first derivative >>> are guaranteed to be continuous, but the second derivative may be >>> discontinuous. >>> ---- >>>=20 >>> Does this look ok? >>>=20 >>> I added your name to test.c >>>=20 >>> Patrick >>>=20 >>> On 04/03/2014 01:58 PM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>> Hi Patrick, yes feel free to change the example dataset. I used it be= cause it=92s the same as I put into the test.c code, and other interpolatio= n methods used randomly-generated data. >>>>=20 >>>> For the description in the docs, I might recommend a different wording: >>>>=20 >>>> @deffn {Interpolation Type} gsl_interp_steffen >>>> Steffen=92s method guarantees the monoticity of the interpolating func= tion >>>> between the given data points. Thus minima and maxima can only occur >>>> exactly at the data points, and there can never be spurious oscillatio= ns between data points. >>>> The interpolated function and its first derivative are guaranteed to b= e continuous, >>>> but the second derivative may be discontinuous. >>>> @end deffn >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks for supporting my work! I=92m very excited to be officially co= ntributing to an open-source project. Could you check the copyright & attr= ibution parts of the code files that I modified? I=92m not sure what is co= rrect, but I see author=92s names and dates. I added mine to the steffen.c= , but should I add it also to test.c and the others? >>>>=20 >>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>=20 >>>> On Mar 31, 2014, at 15:24 , Patrick Alken = wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> I couldn't reproduce the figure in Steffen's paper, so I found anothe= r dataset which nicely illustrates oscillation issues with Akima: >>>>>=20 >>>>> J. M. Hyman, Accurate Monotonicity preserving cubic interpolation, >>>>> SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput. 4, 4, 1983. >>>>>=20 >>>>> The dataset is simpler than your randomly generated plot and I think = its a little easier to compare the different methods. >>>>>=20 >>>>> I added an example program and a figure to the manual (in the steffen= branch). >>>>>=20 >>>>> I am hoping to finish everything up and merge into master by the end = of the week. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Thanks again, >>>>> Patrick >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> On 03/31/2014 02:37 PM, Patrick Alken wrote: >>>>>> Ok I made a new branch 'steffen' in the GSL repository with your lat= est >>>>>> changes, thanks for all your work on this. I still want to update the >>>>>> docs a little and do some more testing on my own before merging it i= nto >>>>>> master. I made a blurb about gsl_interp_steffen in the docs: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> ---- >>>>>> @deffn {Interpolation Type} gsl_interp_steffen >>>>>> Steffen's method for monotonic interpolation (not allowing minima = or >>>>>> maxima >>>>>> to occur between adjacent data points). The resulting curve is >>>>>> piecewise cubic on each interval with the slope at each grid point >>>>>> chosen to ensure monotonicity and prevent undesired oscillations. = The >>>>>> first-order derivative is everywhere continuous. >>>>>> @end deffn >>>>>> ---- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Can you read this and make sure I haven't said anything inaccurate? = Or >>>>>> let me know any suggestions you think its important to add for the u= sers >>>>>> benefit to understand what this method does. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On 03/27/2014 11:17 AM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>>>> By the way, my the second test function in interpolation/test.c use= s randomly-generated data points, but actually serves to nicely illustrate = the difference between major non-linear interpolation methods. See the lin= ked graph for a comparison of the interpolation for those data using my imp= lementation of steffen, and the existing GSL akima and cubic spline methods. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> https://github.com/jfcaron3/gsl-steffen-devel/blob/steffen/interpol= ation/compare.pdf (I couldn=92t send a pdf to the mailing list, and I don= =92t know how to view a pdf on github=92s website, but I guess you can just= get the image when you clone the repo.) >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> While the cubic spline and akima methods preserve continuity of the= second derivatives, they are not monotonic and can have oscillations that = are often undesireable. The steffen method sacrifices continuity of the se= cond derivative (but maintains it for the first) in order to maintain monot= icity, which also eliminates weird oscillations. In Steffen=92s paper, the= re is also an example graph where the akima method is unstable (a very smal= l change in one data point makes a large change in the interpolated functio= n), while the steffen method is stable by construction. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Mar 27, 2014, at 01:10 , Patrick Alken wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> The code is looking very good - I will try to find time in the ne= xt few days to do some tests and import it into GSL >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>> ________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> From: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org [gsl-discuss-owner@sourcew= are.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron [jfcaron@phas.ubc.ca] >>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 7:10 PM >>>>>>>>> To: gsl-discuss@sourceware.org >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Compiling & Testing New Interpolation Type >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> I have now fixed the problems with the tests and added a more rob= ust test with lots of data points. I am effectively ready to give a pull r= equest from my github repo. Let me know what I need to do to facilitate th= is. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On Mar 25, 2014, at 15:51 , Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Git and Github weren=92t as intimidating as I expected. I have = a repo here with the =93steffen=94 branch including my changes: >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jfcaron3/gsl-steffen-devel >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> The Savannah git repo didn=92t include a configure script, and I= got my modified GSL+Steffen code to compile by directly modifying interpol= ation/Makefile AFTER running ./configure, so I=92m not sure how to compile = the files cloned from my github repo. At least it=92s easier to see the ch= anges now. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> On Mar 25, 2014, at 14:56 , Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> I=92ve improved my initial code greatly. You can find it here: >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jfcaron/+junk/my_steffen/files >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> You can compile it into GSL by adding in the interpolation/Make= file references to =93steffen.c=94, =93steffen.lo=94, and =93steffen.Plo=94= exactly where there are currently references to =93akima.*=94. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> I=92ve tried adding an =93integ=94 method, but I=92m afraid I d= on=92t even understand the workings of the integ methods for the existing i= nterpolation types. I couldn=92t just copy from the akima.c integ method b= ecause they use a build-in spline calculation function (which I also don=92= t understand). Reading uncommented C code is pretty hard. My test program= shows that the integration method isn=92t obviously broken, but it fails t= he tests I wrote in interpolation/test.c The actual interpolation and deri= vatives seem to work and pass the tests. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> I=92ve not used github before, so I guess my next move should b= e to learn the basics and start using that, since otherwise describing my a= dditions & changes are hard to follow. In the meantime, is anyone able to = explain how the heck the =93integ=94 methods work? >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2014, at 11:30 , Patrick Alken wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes that green curve is rather strange and doesn't seem much b= etter than the cubic spline. I like simplicity too so lets proceed with imp= orting the steffen code. >>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/20/2014 12:18 PM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Definitely an advantage of a) is that it is conceptually simp= le. b) is 44 pages while a) is only 7. Even if b) is somehow mathematical= ly superior, I like the idea of understanding the tools that I am using (an= d being able to explain it to my academic supervisor/conference attendees). >>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>> The MESA astrophysics library (C++ unfortunately) actually in= cludes both types, and has a little graph to show differences: >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://mesa.sourceforge.net/interp_1D.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually their graph is confusing, blue is supposed to be a),= green b), but the green curve isn=92t piece-wise monotonic between the dat= a points. I=92m starting to think maybe Stetten and Huynh mean different t= hings when they say =93monotonic=94. I=92ll try to read Huynh=92s paper to= see if they define what they are trying to do. Steffen is pretty clear ab= out his technique being a for an interpolating function that is monotonic b= etween data points - i.e. the interpolating function doesn=92t change sign = between data points, and extrema can only occur at said data points. >>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2014, at 11:03 , Patrick Alken wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see question 1) is answered by section 4 of Steffen's pape= r - the method works on all data sets, and preserves monotonicity in each i= nterval, which is nice. They also state that method (c) has some serious dr= awbacks. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately paper (b) doesn't reference (a) and so its dif= ficult to tell whether (b) offers any advantage over (a) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/20/2014 11:52 AM, Patrick Alken wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, I'm moving this discussion over to gsl-discuss which is= more suited >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for development issues. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have 2 naive questions which you may be able to answer si= nce you've >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been working on this code. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) If the Steffen algorithm is applied to non-monotonic dat= a, will it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still provide a solution or does the method encounter an er= ror? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Earlier on the GSL list it was mentioned that there are = 3 different >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> methods for interpolating monotonic data: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (a) M.Steffen, "A simple method for monotonic interpolation= in one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dimension", Astron. Astrophys. 239, 443-450 (1990). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (b) H.T.Huynh, "Accurate Monotone Cubic Interpolation", SIA= M J. Numer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anal. 30, 57-100 (1993). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (c) Fritsch, F. N.; Carlson, R. E., "Monotone Piecewise Cub= ic >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Interpolation", SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 17 (2), 238=96246 (198= 0). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't looked at (c) but it seems that (a) and (b) both = use piecewise >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cubic polynomials and preserve monotonicity. Do you happen = to know if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one method is superior to the other? If one method is signi= ficantly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better than the other two it would make more sense to inclu= de that one >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in GSL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/20/2014 11:37 AM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I didn=92t bother doing the integration function at t= he time because I was having trouble just compiling. I will add the integr= ation function, and re-write the eval and deriv/deriv2 functions to use Hor= ner=92s scheme for the polynomials. I can generate some comparison graphs = using fake data like in Steffen=92s paper, that sounds easy enough. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I=92ll look at the interpolation/test.c file and see if I = can come up with similar tests. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for offering to help with the integration into GSL = itself. I don=92t know a lot of the procedures (or even politics sometimes= !) involved. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 20, 2014, at 10:22 , Patrick Alken wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did notice you talking about 1.6 in your earlier messag= es, but assumed it was a typo and you meant 1.16, oops. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 03/20/2014 11:11 AM, Jean-Fran=E7ois Caron wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My original problem was that I wanted to add an interpol= ation type to GSL. Specifically I want monotonic cubic-splines following t= he description in Steffen (1990): http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1990A%26A.= ..239..443S >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I took a quick look at your code earlier and it looks pre= tty nice. I noticed you commented out the _integ function - is this somethi= ng you could add to make it feature complete with the other interpolation t= ypes? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is important to add automated tests for this. Can you = look at interpolation/test.c and design similar tests for your new method? = Also I think it would be nice to add a figure to the manual illustrating th= e differences between cubic, akima, and your new steffen method (similar to= the figures in the Steffen paper). This would help users a lot when trying= to decide what method to use. Do you happen to have a dataset which shows = a nice contrast like Figs 1, 3 and 8 from that paper? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When everything is ready I would be happy to add it to GS= L, as we are already planning to update the interpolation module for the ne= xt release. When I find some time I want to import the 2D interpolation ext= ension discussed previously, and also add Hermite interpolation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be easiest for us if you could clone the GSL git= repository and make your changes there. You could make a new branch called= 'steffen' or something and publish it to github, or just send a patch file= to me, whichever is easiest. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 19, 2014, at 18:40 , Dave Allured - NOAA Affiliate= wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> More data. I tried the same plain build recipe, GSL 1.= 16 on our test >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> machine which is at Mac OS 10.9.3. Got another perfect= build, no make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> check errors, no PPC-related issues. Outputs on reques= t, please be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CC=3Dclang >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CFLAGS=3D-g >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ./configure --prefix /Users/dallured/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.= os10.9 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9 57> sw_vers >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ProductName: Mac OS X >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ProductVersion: 10.9.3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BuildVersion: 13D17 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9/src 36> \ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? grep -i '# [a-z]' ../logfiles/make-check.0319a.log | = sort | uniq -c >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 45 # ERROR: 0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 45 # FAIL: 0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 42 # PASS: 1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 # PASS: 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 45 # SKIP: 0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 42 # TOTAL: 1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 # TOTAL: 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 45 # XFAIL: 0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 45 # XPASS: 0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9 62> \ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? grep -c -i ppc logfiles/*319a*log >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logfiles/configure.0319a.os10.9.log:0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logfiles/install.0319a.log:0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logfiles/make-check.0319a.log:0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logfiles/make.0319a.log:0 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mac27:~/Disk/3rd/gsl/1.16.os10.9 65> \ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? grep -i ppc src/config.h src/config.log src/config.st= atus >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/config.h:/* #undef HAVE_GNUPPC_IEEE_INTERFACE */ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/config.log:HAVE_GNUPPC_IEEE_INTERFACE=3D'' >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> src/config.status:S["HAVE_GNUPPC_IEEE_INTERFACE"]=3D"" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Dave >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Jean-Francois Caron >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dave is correct, I am using an "i686" 64-bit x86 mac. = For some reason >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is still looking for the PPC mac header file. The = ./configure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stage correctly identifies my system, so it's a bit st= range. Also GSL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> installs without errors when I do it from MacPorts, an= d MacPorts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't seem to do anything other than ./configure && = make, from my >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reading of the portfile. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> When I get back to my Mac, I will look at the NOTES fi= le to see if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything needs to be done for 10.9. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Fran=E7ois >=20