I’d forgotten the start to this thread, so have just checked: it seems to have started with Raul Miller discussing J performance for a Rosetta Code task about repunit primes; “large” numbers, eg ~10^1200 are considered. But later correspondence suggests interest has shifted to incorporation of some powerful numerical libraries, which could incidentally handle large primes.
So: what is the problem you’re currently trying to solve? Thanks, Mike Sent from my iPad > On 10 Mar 2022, at 00:15, Eric Iverson <[email protected]> wrote: > > There is no need to static link. A dynamic link is easier. The 'standard' > build of the dll would be distributed in the J bin folder and would work > just as would the static link. But if you wanted a different build, it is > easy to do. > >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 4:09 PM Elijah Stone <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> jconsole/etc. already dynamically link to libj, so I think dynamic linking >> is fine. Not hard to bundle the requisite libs. That said, my preference >> is for libbf rather than gmp (and I started on something oriented >> thattaways), and it happens to be permissively licensed. >> >>> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022, Julian Fondren wrote: >>> >>> I got very little through February for various reasons, but I'm back on >>> it. I think static linking is the best way as well, including to avoid >>> newer builds of J having new dependencies that make J not work on >>> machines where it previously did, but if so it probably can't be GMP for >>> licensing reasons. My plan's just to get something working, with the >>> expectation that various issues like this will be easy to decide later. >>> >>> ------- Original Message ------- >>> >>> On Wednesday, March 9th, 2022 at 1:21 PM, Raul Miller < >> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 8:38 PM Julian Fondren [email protected] >> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I'll get it done. >>>> >>>> How is this proceeding? >>>> >>>> (I have been tempted to tackle this integration myself, but between >>>> >>>> laptop failures and some other issues, I have not gotten around to it, >>>> >>>> yet.) >>>> >>>> I will say this: >>>> >>>> Because of how J is typically installed, I think that the right >>>> >>>> approach here would be to statically link against libgmp. Dynamic >>>> >>>> links are appropriate in a variety of cases, but not this one, not for >>>> >>>> the initial port. (Once libgmp is supported, it would be possible to >>>> >>>> build J against a dynamically linked libgmp, but while that might be >>>> >>>> right for some people, most people are not going to want to deal with >>>> >>>> the consequences of that approach.) >>>> >>>> Anyways, ... I might yet get around to tackling this by myself, but if >>>> >>>> you're making good progress, I should probably either just wait or try >>>> >>>> to pitch in on issues which are eating too much of your time. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Raul >>>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
