[SciPy-dev] genetic algorithm, number theory, filterdesign,zerofinding
Chuck.Harris at sdl.usu.edu
Thu Apr 11 14:44:29 CDT 2002
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pearu at scipy.org [mailto:pearu at scipy.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 1:19 PM
> To: scipy-dev at scipy.org
> Subject: RE: [SciPy-dev] genetic algorithm, number theory,
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Chuck Harris wrote:
> > > How to you feel about Fortran? Actually C is also fine for me.
> > I don't mind Fortran, and for some things I think it is
> superior to C,
> > but I find that C compilers are easier to come by on all
> platforms; I
> > don't much enjoy cygwin. Also, at this point in time C is more
> > familiar to me. For the root finding, it shouldn't be too
> hard to keep
> > track of reference counting.
> I don't think that SciPy can be freed from Fortran stuff. There is
Absolutely, no argument here.
> > Hmm... f2py handles this?
> Yes, it does (cblas,clapack are wrapped with f2py, for example). The
> signature files may look Fortran but there is actually only little
> difference in wrapping Fortran or C functions. And there are some
> additional hooks available for the signature files that ease
> these small differences (intent(c), fortranname, callstatement,
> callprotoargument etc. statements).
> Of course, I am assuming that C functions do not use
> complicated struct's,
> except the complex one.
Root finders are pretty basic. Looks like the standard call for all of them would be:
with a (python) float return. a,b,xtol should be double, or converted to double. maxiter is integer, and f returns double to the C routine.
There is a disagreement between say, fsolve and bisection, where one has the named argument xtol, and the other tol. How should this be resolved?
I could probably just look at the wrapper for fsolve and make a few changes, eh?
> Scipy-dev mailing list
> Scipy-dev at scipy.net
More information about the Scipy-dev