[plt-scheme] More PLT Scheme as an Alternative to Matlab

My hope would be that he we do some of this groundwork and get the semantics
right, you could try for grants to fund the compiler speedups.

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:06 PM, Doug Williams <
m.douglas.williams at gmail.com> wrote:

> As far as I know, PLT Scheme currently does all of its calculations in
> double-precision. But, I can control the stored representation of the
> underlying representation now. It's that structure than can allow us to code
> efficient butterfly addressing for ffts, etc for the numerical analysis
> code. We can worry about compiler efficiency in the future.
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Robby Findler <
> robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>
>> I think Doug is saying that the user might want, say, 128 bits of
>> precision in their floating point numbers and asking what to do if
>> mzscheme's floats don't support that. (Or do mz's floats support all
>> those different sizes?)
>>
>> Robby
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Eli Barzilay<eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
>> > On Aug 13, Doug Williams wrote:
>> >> That is the default. But, we want to user to be able to control the
>> >> representation for numerical analysis reasons, too. So, we're
>> >> allowing both.
>> >
>> > But if you don't use external libraries, then you're better off just
>> > checking the inputs, but use Scheme values directly.
>> >
>> > --
>> >          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
>> >                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!
>> > _________________________________________________
>> >  For list-related administrative tasks:
>> >  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>> >
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20090813/3900d596/attachment.html>