RE: [ROOT] How to Call CERNLIB routines from the interpreter

From: Philippe Canal (pcanal@popgtw.fnal.gov)
Date: Tue Dec 19 2000 - 16:58:20 MET


Hi,

I know of one (partial) C++ wrapper for GSL.
A C++ interface has been written for the Special function part of the GSL
(See http://www.fnal.gov/docs/working-groups/fpcltf/Pkg/SpecialFunctions/doc/html/0SpecialFunctions.html )

Philippe Canal.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch
> [mailto:owner-roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch]On Behalf Of Christian Holm
> Christensen
> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 7:24 AM
> To: holeczek@us.edu.pl
> Cc: roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch
> Subject: Re: [ROOT] How to Call CERNLIB routines from the interpreter
> 
> 
> Hi ROOT'ers,
> 
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:25:44 +0100 (MET)
> "Jacek M. Holeczek" <holeczek@us.edu.pl> wrote
> concerning ": Re: [ROOT] How to Call CERNLIB routines from the 
> interpreter":
> > > However I do not  think the idea to keep the Fortran environment
> > > just to be able to call  
> 
> I think Valery is right here. Fortran is a ghost that we'd probably
> like to do away with ASAP.
> 
> > That's right. It would be better to implement numerical methods in C++,
> > but in the current situation it is much more cost effective to 
> use existing
> > code, even if it comes from fortran.
> 
> I'd like to direct your attention to the "GNU Scientific Library"
> (GSL) developed, among others, by people from Los Alamos. This is a
> very general library with many many features aimed for scientific
> use. It's written in ANSI C, and is very portable. Also, it's released
> under GPL, making it truely OpenSource. No wrappers in C++ exist, but
> as far as I can tell, it should be fairly easy to do. For a more
> complete description of the features in GSL, please look at 
> 
> 	 http://sources.redhat.com/gsl/
> 
> This avenue, I believe, is a better one then trying to use old Fortran
> libraries. Also, one could probably port the GSL to native C++/ROOT
> code, should one want that. However, a set of C++/ROOT wrappers is
> probably more viable solution, since the GSL team will provide the
> updates, etc. rather then one having to port those each time the GSL
> library is changed. 
> 
> In fact, I see no major problem in ROOT using (OpenSource) third party
> software, like GSL, ClHEP, Blitz++, GEANT4 (is it OpenSource?), SL++,
> and so on. However, using commercial third party software, like NAG-C,
> Microsoft TTF fonts, Objectivity, should be depreciated, or should be
> destributed as contributed third party pacakges. 
> 
> Here's some pointers:
> 
>   GSL:     http://sources.redhat.com/gsl/
>   ClHEP:   http://wwwinfo.cern.ch/asd/lhc++/clhep/
>   Blitz++: http://oonumerics.org/blitz/index.html
>   SL++:	   http://ldeniau.home.cern.ch/ldeniau/html/sl++.html
> 
> And ofcourse:
>   
>   SAL:	   http://SAL.KachinaTech.COM/index.shtml
> 
> Ayway, that's my two pennies worth. 
> 
> Yours, 
> 
> Christian  -----------------------------------------------------------
> Holm Christensen                             Phone:  (+45) 35 35 96 91 
>   Sankt Hansgade 23, 1. th.                  Office: (+45) 353  25 305 
>   DK-2200 Copenhagen N                       Web:    www.nbi.dk/~cholm    
>   Denmark                                    Email:       cholm@nbi.dk
> 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 11:50:40 MET