On Apr 2, 2009, at 8:22 PM, Chris Swierczewski wrote: > Robert, > >> So I understand you better, what you're trying to do is let the user >> provide their functions at runtime rather than at compile time? > > Yes. > >> I think the easiest way to go about this would be to provide >> custom non- >> empty functions that call your code (e.g. via a function pointer the >> way callbacks work) rather than compiling empty stub functions and >> trying to overload the symbols at (load/run)time. > > However (and perhaps my lack of effectively communicating is at fault) > the Fortran functions in the compiled library already call each other. > One thing I can do, however, is wrap these original Fortran functions > with C by adding some wrappers of each said function. The function > wrappers optionally accept function pointers. If it's a null pointer > than call the built-in Fortran function (most of which are already > stubs). However, any non-null function pointer is called in place of > the Fortran. > > That's me thinking aloud. Does it sound like a good plan?
Yes, that sounds like it would work. > I can't really change the organization of the Fortran subroutines in > question since Clawpack users directly use and modify the code. Don't > want to mess with the core functionality. I'm not sure I'm following you here--in wrapping the library you are the middleman. From Clawpack's perspective, you are just a user (and can directly use and modify the code just as anyone else would). I've never personally used Clawpack though, so I can only speak in terms of generalities. I'd be happy to meet with you sometime to look at this if you want as well. - Robert --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
