- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Will you confirm that next release will keep ALL syntax options currently supported?
Link Copied
- « Previous
- Next »
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Harry Bell
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Intel Visual Fortran will adopt the IF7 convention (there may be some minor changes, but I can't think of them offhand.) There will, of course, be switches to get the CVF default back if you want.
Array descriptors are also different between the two implementations. I don't know what they will look like in the future.
Steve
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
> Might we offer
> MSIL as an additional code form in the future?
> Perhaps. Do you really want this? Management at
> Intel seems to think that C++ users may want it but
> not Fortran users.
Management is wrong. I know at least in my case that I have a body of code which we need to be as fast as possible with native IA32 and eventually IA64 code optimizations, but that's only half the Fortran code. The other half would benefit greatly from the managed environment offered by an MSIL backend, since its only purpose is to build data structures for use by VB routines.
In one case I'd really like to invoke a managed delegate on one pile of Fortran code, and get a framework-compatible event back when it's finished churning. Yeah, we could "always do PInvoke" stuff, or wrap a PInvoke call into a managed delegate, but when you're passing big arrays back and forth, the cost of COM or PInvoke becomes a drag.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Steve
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
That IMSL restricts distribution of executables using its libraries is not new, although it may be new to Windows users. When I was working in the MVS (IBM mainframe) world, IMSL used run-time libraries, which were most emphatically not redistributable. When we delivered executables (for MVS or VMS platforms), the recipients were required to have IMSL in place. When enough didn't, the company decided to assemble, using netlib sources, an equivalent. Shockingly, many of the routines on netlib have the same name as the corresponding IMSL routines, which lead many people to conclude the IMSL libraries where based on netlib's 8-).
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
With NAG you distributed their DLL with your app and their DLL checks the run-time environment when it loads; if it isn't yours then NAG checks for a run-time licence for the user of your app, or rather their DLL, and if it's missing your app terminates. You distribute the NAG licence with your app which NAG supplies to you for a royalty fee that you negotiate with them. That way, your success is their success.
I agree that netlib is the source of much of IMSL. Ditto for Matlab. Artists do it all the time. As the Fat Knight in Falstaff puts it: "Art resides in this maxim: Steal with politness and at the right time."
Ciao,
Gerry T.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
They really are quite accomodating, if you don't mind a bit of legal back-and-forth on terms and conditions.
DAn
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Steve
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Ciao,
Gerry T.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
From surfing the Web, I have found several minor variations to the meaning of the acronym. Should it be Mathematical or Mathematics? Statistical or Statistics? Library or Libraries?
Mike
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Nowadays, IMSL doesn't appear to "stand for" anything other than a trademark.
Steve
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- « Previous
- Next »