Re: [Pdl-devel] [Pdl-general] PDL 2.029 released

[Ingo Schmid]

So, I figured the code bit ($TCG), but have no elegant solution ready.
There's no macro to match a complex' and real basic type, no? Ingo

Ingo

On 15.03.21 12:01, Ingo Schmid wrote:

Hi Ed,

creal, etc. including carg, do not cast onto their real-valued counter
part. I think they should, no?

pdl> p $x
1+1i

pdl> p abs $x
1.41421354+0i

pdl> p creal $x
1+0i

pdl> p cimag $x
1+0i

pdl> p carg $y
0.78539816339744828+0i

That leaves conj (complex conjugate) which should return a complex number.

I think these are all.

I think you introduced cfunc in ops.pd with a codestring that's
beyound me. 😁 Where does  $TCG come from? I assume it means handling
types C and G, I don't get the T, at the moment.

Let me know what you think.

Best

Ingo

On 12.03.21 19:25, Ed . wrote:

Dear PDL folks,

PDL 2.029 has just been released. Following Monday’s dev-release, the
CPAN Testers results show no test failures at all, and only a few
build-failures which appear to be caused by an older ExtUtils::F77
erroneously adding “-lquadmath” on a Windows platform that didn’t
have it.

This version’s only changes from 2.028 are to fix a few remaining
test failures for “native complex” numbers on platforms with buggy
libm, and to incorporate some material improvements made to PDLA.

The next steps will be to solidify the native complex support by
adding to PDL::Complex ways translate/have data flow between the two
ways of accessing the information. As an early approach I will be
enhancing PDL::FFTW3 to correctly support native complex numbers. I
still want to make PDL’s “from string” capability support “i” as a
value, but haven’t done so yet. Ingo, your updates (or even pointers
on doing so) to the PDL docs will be very helpful, I hope you’ll find
time to take a look :-)

After the above, the next stages will be to start “splitting the
iceberg” of PDL, starting by extracting a minimal (but not too
minimal) PDL::Core distribution, which I will be checking against the
main PDLPorters other PDL::* distros by making them depend on only
PDL::Core, and ensuring they still work. I am in two minds on whether
to have a true “PDL::Core” with a separate “PDL::Interactive” which
has a bit more (the interactive shells for instance), but have the
feeling that the interactive shells etc are so small and minimal in
terms of build that this would not help. Anyone else have views?

Please try this version with all your code, and report problems with
PRs, GitHub issues, or at least email reports!

Best regards,

Ed



_______________________________________________
pdl-general mailing list
pdl-gene...@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-general

_______________________________________________
pdl-devel mailing list
pdl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-devel

_______________________________________________
pdl-devel mailing list
pdl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pdl-devel