Neil Toronto writes: > Enrique, if you don't mind my asking, where does Racket's math library > fall short for the study you have in mind? (Its floating-point support > shouldn't, especially if you work in Typed Racket.) I'm one of its > authors, so I'm looking for suggestions.
>From my own recent experiments with the Racket math library, I can't say there's anything wrong with it. Quite on the contrary, everything that's there works as advertised, and performance has always been good enough for me (but I didn't do serious number crunching yet). The one feature that strikes me as weird is the location of Fourier transforms under "other array operations". Given that they require rather special arrays, and perform a highly domain-specific operation, I'd have expected to find them under something like math/transforms, or perhaps math/signal if it existed. However, the one feature that I miss is similar to what Enrique is asking for: interoperability with other languages. Not because I need something that can't be done reasonably well in Racket, but because there's so much good stuff out there in other languages that I can't possibly rewrite in Racket on my own. In my case, the top language I'd like to connect to is Python. The real problem is that Racket, like many other modern languages including Python and Julia, has its own specific virtual machine whose fundamental tasks, memory and process management, are similar to but incompatible with the VMs of other languages. All languages interface with C, but the times where most useful code was written in C are over. We have less language interoperability today than 20 years ago. Konrad. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
