From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2945 invoked by alias); 6 Sep 2002 14:53:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 2861 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2002 14:53:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO amsfep14-int.chello.nl) (213.46.243.22) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Sep 2002 14:53:26 -0000 Received: from duronbox.nosuchnet ([62.163.16.73]) by amsfep14-int.chello.nl (InterMail vM.5.01.03.06 201-253-122-118-106-20010523) with ESMTP id <20020906145325.VBG6645.amsfep14-int.chello.nl@duronbox.nosuchnet> for ; Fri, 6 Sep 2002 16:53:25 +0200 Received: from arno by duronbox.nosuchnet with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 17nKU9-0007NP-00 for ; Fri, 06 Sep 2002 16:53:25 +0200 Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 07:53:00 -0000 To: gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Guile bindings for GSL and LAPACK Message-ID: <20020906145325.GB28180@duronbox.nosuchnet> References: <20020906133012.GA27554@duronbox.nosuchnet> <20020906135957.GA25511@mojo.tepkom.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cNdxnHkX5QqsyA0e" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020906135957.GA25511@mojo.tepkom.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Arno Peters X-SW-Source: 2002-q3/txt/msg00191.txt.bz2 --cNdxnHkX5QqsyA0e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-length: 787 On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 05:59:57PM +0400, Wartan Hachaturow wrote: > On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 03:30:12PM +0200, Arno Peters wrote: >=20 > > bindings have been tested against Guile 1.4 and GSL 1.2; they were > > produced by using SWIG 1.3. >=20 > Hm. BTW, why can't we produce Python bindings using swig? If I > understand right, pygsl is being written by hands? I'm sure you could. My focus has been, and still is, producing bindings for Guile. This means I have written some functions to ease the integration between GSL and Guile. These functions would have to be rewritten to the Python interface. However, anybody is free to use my work as a basis to produce bindings for Python. Provided of course they adhere to the boundaries set forth in the GNU GPL. Greetings, --=20 Arno --cNdxnHkX5QqsyA0e Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline Content-length: 189 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9eMFl8ADMpEVEv6ERAkDOAKDBkpBOFP9n/R8wnHxK1dqnYwNA3wCfUmnt 6PUzCxOKqlcNAYdJ1NVP/5k= =XaiC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cNdxnHkX5QqsyA0e--