Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Perl > Perl Misc > Re: Program Translation - Nov. 14, 2013

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Program Translation - Nov. 14, 2013

 
 
Ben Bacarisse
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2013
"E.D.G." <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> "E.D.G." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
>> "E.D.G." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...

>
> Etgtab FORTRAN project
> Perl speed comparison
>
> This Etgtab FORTRAN computer program related effort is
> progressing much better than I thought possible. Here is some
> information on the project plus a status report.
>
> The Etgtab program appears to be highly unique. And under the
> right conditions it might be highly valuable to the international
> scientific community. So, what we are attempting to do is get it
> translated into some modern language that researchers around the world
> can have their own programmers easily modify for their specific uses.
>
>
> The first step is to get someone to actually prepare the new
> code. And if it were up to me I would stay with FORTRAN.
>
> It appears that my retired programming colleague is going to be
> willing to do the work since he has the program already partly
> translated. But he will only prepare a True BASIC translation.


There is a slight air in unreality to all this, but just in case this is
a real project, here are a few random observations.

Fortran is still the language that most scientists use, and the program
is already a working Fortran program. The most significant thing you
could do to revive this work is to document it and tidy up the code. If
you wan to modernise the code (and there could be benefits in terms of
clarity if you do so) a modern version of standard Fortran is the
obvious choice.

However, a few well-written pages explaining what the program does and
how it does it, together with some more detailed descriptions of the
algorithms will probably be more beneficial than any updating,
especially if you can find references to papers describing the original
work.

Though to my mind secondary, tidying up the code would also help.
Things could be clarified by introducing a few more utility functions,
using more descriptive names, indenting loops, replacing out-dated
constructs with newer ones, and so on.

These two things will make the program far more accessible to the
scientific community. Translating it into a proprietary (paid for)
implementation of Basic will ensure that no one ever uses it again.
True BASIC does not even have a Linux/Unix port.

Finally, why are you timing Perl arithmetic? A translation into Perl
does not seem to be an option.

<snip>
--
Ben.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
James Van Buskirk
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2013
"E.D.G." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) m...

> For one thing, the input and output routines need to be changed.
> And we want it to be able to generate charts or graphs. The existing
> program will generate only text data.


You can generate charts and graphs in Fortran. Just use OpenGL via
f2003 C interoperability. One project that does this is f03GL.
Another project interfaces to GTK (gtk-fortran).

--
write(*,*) transfer((/17.392111325966148d0,6.5794487871554595D-85, &
6.0134700243160014d-154/),(/'x'/)); end


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Roy Smith
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Tim Prince <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Perhaps you would start with an automatic indentation tool before
> translating. You may have a rule against using current syntax and
> indentation for Fortran, but others don't.


Does anybody still use ratfor?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Richard Maine
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2013
Roy Smith <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Tim Prince <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you would start with an automatic indentation tool before
> > translating. You may have a rule against using current syntax and
> > indentation for Fortran, but others don't.

>
> Does anybody still use ratfor?


No. Well, I suppose it is possible you might find a soul or two
somewhere, but you'd have to look prety hard. Ratfor became essentially
obsolete with Fortran 77.

--
Richard Maine
email: last name at domain . net
domain: summer-triangle
 
Reply With Quote
 
Rainer Weikusat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2013
Roy Smith <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> Henry Law <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> On 17/11/13 14:37, E.D.G. wrote:
>> > All of my own important programs are written using Perl. I am starting
>> > to run into calculation speed limitations with one of the programs.

>>
>> Your Perl code is, er, sub-optimal. There is absolutely no point in
>> doing benchmarks until you've improved the code.

>
> Having spent many years in science (molecular biology), I disagree with
> this sentiment.
>
> Scientists view computer programs as tools, no different from any other
> piece of lab equipment or instrumentation they use. When picking a tool
> to use, it's perfectly reasonable to evaluate what performance you can
> get out of that without having to be an expert in its use. If I'm using
> a spectrophotometer, there may be many things that instrument is capable
> of doing, but as long as I'm getting the data I need from it, it's
> serving my purpose. My goal is to do science, not to be an expert on
> optics, or electronics, or data processing.
>
> The same goes for programming languages.


Indeed it does. So, while your comfortable with BUYING spectrophotometers
built by people who know how to do that, why on earth do you insist on
hacking your own 'Rocky Horror Picture Show' crap code together to
evaluate the data INSTEAD of concentrating on 'the science'?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlton Wilbur
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2013
>>>>> "BB" == Ben Bacarisse <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

BB> There is a slight air in unreality to all this,

This is a far more polite way of putting it than I would. It's an
earthquake predictor based on pseudoscience and technobabble.

BB> Finally, why are you timing Perl arithmetic? A translation into
BB> Perl does not seem to be an option.

EDG has been trying ineffectually to get this suite of programs to work,
integrating them with gnuplot and a Perl web application, for as long as
I can remember. I suspect years ago someone told him that Perl was the
One True Language for web applications and the evidence of the
intervening decade has not been enough to convince him otherwise.

Followups set to comp.lang.perl.misc; c.l.python and c.l.fortran have
enough crazy overlap from c.l.p.m without adding me to the mix.

Charlton


--
Charlton Wilbur
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
gamo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2013
El 18/11/13 05:22, Charlton Wilbur escribió:
>>>>>> "BB" == Ben Bacarisse <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

>
> BB> There is a slight air in unreality to all this,
>
> This is a far more polite way of putting it than I would. It's an
> earthquake predictor based on pseudoscience and technobabble.
>


Maybe, but who knows? AFAIK could be small earthquakes caused
by man made interventions. There was a recent scandal in Spain
about that.

Anyway, giving to someone an opinion is cheap. Recently I look
at open mpi project and see F77 and F90 examples. So, Fortran
it's not dead and he could stay with it and do new things in
that or another language, i.e. using files between them.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlton Wilbur
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2013
>>>>> "g" == gamo <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

g> El 18/11/13 05:22, Charlton Wilbur escribió:

>> This is a far more polite way of putting it than I would. It's
>> an earthquake predictor based on pseudoscience and technobabble.


g> Maybe, but who knows?

This is why we have the scientific method. If EDG's model is useful, it
will have predictive power, and he should be able to predict an
earthquake with it. So he says something like "according to my model,
there will be an earthquake of this approximate magnitude at this
location in the month of February 2014." Then we wait and see.

Without that falsifiable hypothesis, then all he has is pseudoscience
and technobabble. He's been at this project for several years now and
to my knowledge has not made one verifiable prediction. This puts him
in the class of charlatan and mountebank; at least he is not trying to
convince us of the existence of ectoplasm or give us messages from our
dead relatives.

Charlton




--
Charlton Wilbur
(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tim McDaniel
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2013
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Charlton Wilbur <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>This is why we have the scientific method. If EDG's model is useful,
>it will have predictive power, and he should be able to predict an
>earthquake with it. So he says something like "according to my
>model, there will be an earthquake of this approximate magnitude at
>this location in the month of February 2014." Then we wait and see.


Also, the field of precise local earthquake prediction has had a lot
of attempts and falsified claims. ("Precise" to exclude long-term
probabilities, which are along the lines of "the 2008 Uniform
California Earthquake Rupture Forecast (UCERF) has estimated that the
probability of an M >= 6.7 earthquake within the next 30 years on the
northern and southern segments of the San Andreas fault is somewhere
between 21% and 59%.")

So I think it's more plausible to have a priori suspicion of claims
here.

--
Tim McDaniel, (E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlton Wilbur
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-19-2013
>>>>> "TMcD" == Tim McDaniel <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

TMcD> So I think it's more plausible to have a priori suspicion of
TMcD> claims here.

Oh, I think it's entirely likely that the whole earthquake prediction
project is Internet-amplified crackpottery of the least harmful and most
entertaining sort. But the response to "you never know" is
"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence," and the number of
people who simply don't understand the scientific method -- and thus who
say "you never know" because they will never, in fact, know -- is
staggering.

Charlton



--
Charlton Wilbur
(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: Program Translation - Nov. 14, 2013 mecej4 Perl Misc 3 11-17-2013 05:02 PM
Re: Program Translation - Nov. 14, 2013 mecej4 Python 3 11-17-2013 05:02 PM
Re: Program Translation - Nov. 14, 2013 Terence Perl Misc 0 11-16-2013 09:31 AM
Re: Program Translation - Nov. 14, 2013 Terence Python 0 11-16-2013 09:31 AM
Nov 7 TODAY & Nov 22 - Join Global FreeSW Python GNU(Linux) HW Culturemeeting via VOIP - BerkeleyTIP GlobalTIP - For Forwarding john_re Python 0 11-07-2009 12:11 PM



Advertisments