[Haskell-cafe] Runge-Kutta and architectural style

[Uwe Hollerbach]

Hi, Richard, these are interesting suggestions, I may explore them a bit.

I tried initially to make something that would be usable without too
much pain for small-to-medium problem, and that could be used, albeit
with a performance hit, for a larger problem; but I'm sure I am
nowhere near what could be achieved for a larger problem. On the other
hand, it's quite possible that evaluation of the derivative function
would dominate, so that the time spent in the actual RK code would be
negligible; in that case, this might already be as good as it needs to
be.

Purely for my own interest, I doubt whether I'll make this public
unless someone specifically asks, I'm playing with a code generator
from this, that will try to generate good code from these tables --
but it's C code so far, not haskell. This isn't really a practical
thing, if I needed the ultimate C routine, it would have already been
faster and simpler to just write it directly instead of the
code-generation stuff I've been doing, but hey...

Uwe

On 4/26/09, Richard O'Keefe <ok at cs.otago.ac.nz> wrote:
> I was interested to see a Runge-Kutta package
> posted to this list recently, particularly as
> I have a fairly simple-minded non-adaptive RK
> "generator": an AWK script that takes a table
> and some optional stuff and spits out C.  The
> Haskell package is, of course, a lot prettier
> than my AWK program, as well as offering some
> adaptive methods, which is important.
>
> We can imagine a spectrum of RK packages:
>
> (1) Higher order function taking some runtime
>      parameters.  That's what we got.
>
> (2) The same specialised for a known table at
>      compile time.  Doable using the code that
>      we were given plus SPECIALIZE pragmas.  I
>      don't how well that works across modules.
>
> (3) A generator that writes Haskell source.
>
> (4) Template Haskell.
>
> (5) A generator that generates native code to
>      be called through FFI.
>
> The question is, how do you decide what's the
> appropriate approach?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
>