Scientific computing with D

[Lars Kyllingstad]

Don wrote:
> Lars Kyllingstad wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> Searching dsource, I find that many nice modules and libraries have 
>> been made already:
>>  - MultiArray (Bill, Fawzi)
>>  - dstat (dsimcha)
>>  - blip (Fawzi)
>>  - MathExtra, BLADE (Don)
>>  - Scrapple/backmath (BCS)
>>  - Scrapple/units (BCS)
>>  - bindings to GSL, BLAS, etc.
>>  - ...and probably more
>>
>> Myself, I've written/ported some routines for numerical 
>> differentiation and integration, one- and multi-dimensional 
>> root-finding and some very basic linear algebra, but so far only for 
>> personal use. Currently, I'm thinking of porting QUADPACK to D.
>>
>> I think it would be really nice if many or all of the above mentioned 
>> things could be collected in a single library, together with all kinds 
>> of other stuff.
> 
> Yes. I have put all of my completed code into tango.math, and there's a 
> fair bit of Fawzi's code in there as well, now. There's a vague plan to 
> integrate Bill's stuff eventually, too.

Nice. There were some things in tango.math which I hadn't noticed. :) 
But I guess at some point one has to draw the line as to what actually 
belongs in a "standard library", and what should be put into a library 
of its own. I'm not sure where that line goes, though.

> Something that I think is true of all the libraries above, is that 
> almost none of the code cares if it is Tango or Phobos. But currently, 
> you have to choose, because there's nowhere to put common code.

One reason for that is probably that the math modules of Phobos and 
Tango are written by you, and are more or less identical. ;) That fact 
would also help to make a full-fledged scientific library independent of 
whether Phobos or Tango is used.

>> [...]
>>
>> So, what do you think? Am I making any sense? Am I the only one 
>> interested in these things?
>>
>> All of the above are, of course, my personal opinions. What are yours?
> 
> I agree with pretty much everything you've said. I think all that's 
> lacking is a bit of organisation. There are quite a lot of scientific 
> programmers here, including an impressive number of library developers. 
> We could really use a rallying point.
> 
> I wonder if it would make sense for Walter to create a NG dedicated to 
> scientific programming. digitalmars.D.sci or digitalmars.D.scientific or 
> digitalmars.D.math or similar.

I would certainly join it.

-Lars