Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2005
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2005

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Proposal to get Stephen to Improve the lot ofSpace Shuttle Programmers

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg60391] Re: [mg60350] Re: [mg60327] Proposal to get Stephen to Improve the lot ofSpace Shuttle Programmers
  • From: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
  • Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 05:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
  • Organization: Mathematics & Statistics, Univ. of Mass./Amherst
  • References: <200509140727.DAA26543@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: murray at math.umass.edu
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

There already IS a tool for converting Mathematica programs to optimized 
C++ code, namely "MathCode C+++".  See:

   http://wolfram.com/products/applications/mathcode/

I haven't used it, among other reasons for its steep cost.  (Educational 
price is $1,150 for Windows or Linux, $1,800 for Solaris; more than 
thrice that for standard price.)

David Annetts wrote:
> Hi John,
> 
> 
>>    Can I get a conversation started about this topic? 
>>Will a tool to convert FORTRAN to mathematica code be useful? 
>>
>>The purpose would be to verify the integrity of the FORTRAN 
>>code and then possibly recompile it to c++, using 
>>Mathematica's features.
>>
>>The goal would be to take all that FORTRAN code out there and 
>>give Mathematicians more option when designing code for 
>>embedded systems. 
> 
> 
> I'd suggest that a tool going the other way (ie Mathematica to F95, F2K or
> some variety of c++) would be far more useful than a tool to convert Fortran
> code to Mathematica.  In this way, we might combine rapid application
> development (Mathematica) with vastly superior execution speed (pretty much
> any compiled language).  
> 
> As for Mathematica output to compiled languages (as opposed to interpreted),
> there is already MathCore's very expensive addons viz. MathC++ and MathF90
> (http://www.mathcore.com/index.shtml).  
> 
> Secondly, there is MathLink, which enables one to link _existing_ code
> running as an executable to Mathematica.  
> 
> I'd like to suggest that perhaps with version 6, WRI might consider revising
> their Fortran output so that it is at least free-format and takes advantage
> of even F90's more modern features than their current F77 output.
> 
> In summary, no, I don't think your tool would be particularly useful.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dave.
> 
> 

-- 
Murray Eisenberg                     murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower      phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts                413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street            fax   413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305


  • Prev by Date: Re: Batch
  • Next by Date: Re: Question concerning MakeBoxes
  • Previous by thread: Re: Proposal to get Stephen to Improve the lot ofSpace Shuttle Programmers
  • Next by thread: Re: Proposal to get Stephen to Improve the lot ofSpace Shuttle Programmers