Hello Matthew,
Monday, May 29, 2006, 10:54:36 PM, you wrote:
> If possible I'd like to memory manage on the Haskell side. All of the
> calls to BLAS and LAPACK that I'm aware of assume that
> all arrays are allocated outside of the C or Fortran that implement the
> matrix algorithms. They never
If possible I'd like to memory manage on the Haskell side. All of the
calls to BLAS and LAPACK that I'm aware of assume that
all arrays are allocated outside of the C or Fortran that implement the
matrix algorithms. They never return buffers to
newly allocated arrays. So what I'd like to do is
Hello Matthew,
Monday, May 29, 2006, 8:04:56 PM, you wrote:
> What is the difference between the ForeignArray defined in this source
> and the StorableArray? The source code of both modules are very similar.
the devil in details :) - StorableArray in 6.4 is slow because it uses
ForeignPtr. ther
What is the difference between the ForeignArray defined in this source
and the StorableArray? The source code of both modules are very similar.
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello minh,
Monday, May 29, 2006, 2:01:29 PM, you wrote:
hi,
Bulat, i quote the doc for Data.Array.Storable
Hello Matthew,
Monday, May 29, 2006, 7:38:40 PM, you wrote:
> How hard would it be to build 6.5 on a windows box without visual studio
> 2003?
there are prebuilt installations at GHC site, last of those is
http://www.haskell.org/ghc/dist/current/dist/ghc-6.5.20060328-i386-unknown-mingw32.tar.gz
How hard would it be to build 6.5 on a windows box without visual studio
2003?
Regards
Bulat Ziganshin wrote:
Hello minh,
Monday, May 29, 2006, 2:01:29 PM, you wrote:
hi,
Bulat, i quote the doc for Data.Array.Storable :
"It is similar to IOUArray but slower. Its advantage is t
Yes that's true, if the problem could be formulated as monolothic
operations on large matrices, then Matlab will be as fast as
anything else. My current Matlab implementation, however, generates
hundreds of 'small' matrices (say 32 x 32 complex roughly) and does nasty
order cubic operations on
Hello minh,
Monday, May 29, 2006, 2:01:29 PM, you wrote:
> hi,
> Bulat, i quote the doc for Data.Array.Storable :
> "It is similar to IOUArray but slower. Its advantage is that it's
> compatible with C."
> So you speak about Storable because Matthew wants to use BLAS and LAPACK ?
of course. IOU
hi,
Bulat, i quote the doc for Data.Array.Storable :
"It is similar to IOUArray but slower. Its advantage is that it's
compatible with C."
So you speak about Storable because Matthew wants to use BLAS and LAPACK ?
Cheers,
mt
2006/5/29, Bulat Ziganshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hello Matthew,
Monda
Hello Matthew,
Monday, May 29, 2006, 1:38:38 AM, you wrote:
> The third and final concern is the point of this post. How does one
> handle state efficiently in Haskell?
> I've seen the various state monads and gained a superficial enough
> understanding to be concerned about
> how useful they a
ah... simulation in haskell ... that's a thing i thought a bit of ..
(disclaimer : i'm not so good at haskell, so... :)
here how i've started :
you have your global state : it's a bunch of IORef or STRef. Each one
maps to one of the individual thing you want to update. You can choose
the hierarc
On Sunday 28 May 2006 23:38, Matthew Bromberg wrote:
> I've been toying with the idea of using Haskell to write a medium sized
> simulation
> of a wireless network. However I have a number of concerns as I've
> begun to
> program a bit more in Haskell.
>
> The first concern is that the simulation
I've been toying with the idea of using Haskell to write a medium sized
simulation
of a wireless network. However I have a number of concerns as I've
begun to
program a bit more in Haskell.
The first concern is that the simulation needs to be fast, much faster
than Matlab
for example, to jus
13 matches
Mail list logo
