Re: Mathematica to .NET compiler
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg79542] Re: Mathematica to .NET compiler
- From: Jon Harrop <jon at ffconsultancy.com>
- Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 00:04:14 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <200707200725.DAA24728@smc.vnet.net> <f7sflm$rs0$1@smc.vnet.net> <f86onh$g19$1@smc.vnet.net> <f8f40s$s5$1@smc.vnet.net>
Peter Pein wrote: > I think it would be more promising to build a tool which translates > Mathematica to a declarative language and to build a hybrid, running > easy-to-translate parts in native code and calling the Mathematica > Kernel for hard tasks. Yes. I think this is an excellent idea. I would welcome a Mathematica compiler that let you create stand-alone executables from your Mathematica source code. I think it would greatly broaden Mathematica's applicability. > While learning the basics, I came around to Haskell, OCAML and of course > Prolog. My knowledge about these languages is too small for now but I > think in a year or one and a half I'll try to find some people to start > such a project... You may be interested in the tutorial information on our site. Also, I recently updated our ray tracer language comparison to include Haskell: http://www.ffconsultancy.com/languages/ray_tracer/ There was a huge gap between languages like Mathematica and C++/Fortran. I think Haskell and OCaml do an excellent job of filling this gap. -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/?usenet
- References:
- Mathematica to .NET compiler
- From: Jon Harrop <jon@ffconsultancy.com>
- Mathematica to .NET compiler