From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10229 invoked by alias); 17 Feb 2007 15:08:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 10219 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Feb 2007 15:08:46 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vms042pub.verizon.net (HELO vms042pub.verizon.net) (206.46.252.42) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:08:41 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([141.156.180.214]) by vms042.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JDM00K464Q255V0@vms042.mailsrvcs.net> for gsl-discuss@sourceware.org; Sat, 17 Feb 2007 09:08:27 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 15:08:00 -0000 From: Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd@verizon.net> Subject: Re: test release gsl-1.8.90.tar.gz In-reply-to: <20070216163444.GE923@austin.ibm.com> To: Linas Vepstas Cc: gsl-discuss@sourceware.org Message-id: <45D71A6A.3030208@verizon.net> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: <873b57h9dg.wl%bjg@network-theory.co.uk> <45D53B0C.1090109@verizon.net> <20070216163444.GE923@austin.ibm.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Macintosh/20061207) 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 X-SW-Source: 2007-q1/txt/msg00033.txt.bz2 Linas Vepstas wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 12:03:08AM -0500, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: > >> I am in the middle of implementing special functions for gcc (The C++ >> standards people are adding a list of special functions to the library - >> or rather to an adjunct of the library.) >> > > Are you doing this by copying code from GSL, or is this an all-new > implementation? I'd hate to see an all-new implementation become part > of the standard; C++ has a history of wrecking things and so remarks > like this make me nervous. (For example, the complex math type has been > wrecked for half a decade, and I find it amazing that no effort has > been made to fix it or make it operate in a compatible fashion. This > is one reason I've stopped using C++ for mathematics; unfortunately, > I still have a raft of old code, and so I continue to feel the pain.) > > --lnas > > There are very large portions either from GSL or from the same sources as GSL uses (Abramowitz & Stegun, Olver, ..). Construction of a special function library is just too difficult to do from scratch without leveraging the efforts of others where possible. The portion of the C++ standard (actually a technical report - TR1) is here: TR1 The relevant sections are 5 - special functions and a random number generator. Also section 8 is C99 compatibility. They deliberately adopted a C99 style calling convention to leave open the possibility that C99 could adopt this too. The implementation of special functions for GCC should appear in mainline within a week or two. The random number generator and almost all of the C99 compatibility parts are already in. These should be released with gcc-4.3. Concerning complex I swore that conforming C++ was supposed to store the real and imaginary parts in such a way that you could interact with C99. I *think* you should be able to cast back and forth and have it work. Also, a large part of this TR1 deals with syncing C99 with C++ (section 8). I thought there was a way you could grab the raw implementation and use it in C99 and conversely put a C99 _Complex in a constructor for C++ complex. I'll dig around and see. Ed Smith-Rowland