Re: Programming Languages Decisions

[gw7rib@aol.com]

On 18 Aug, 13:59, "E.D.G." <edgrs...@ix.ne tcom.comwrote:

       This report is intended for any computer programming experts who
would like to propose that their favorite programming language is the one
that should be used for the potentially important application that is being
discussed here.

(snip)

       I myself will be trying to convince governments etc. to use the
program for important research work.  It is essentially a probability number
generator.  And among other things I will be trying to get them to develop
more accurate probability equations.  Now that several fundamental and
crucially important physics discoveries have been made there is almost
unlimited room for improvement.  That work should be fairly easy for
government and university researchers and perhaps even independent
researchers once they have the original program.  They will be able to add
their own equations and subroutines to it and use it to test their theories
and data.

(snip)

       The first application enables government, university, and independent
researchers to compare earthquakes with one another and in the process learn
how they are being triggered.  As far as I am aware, this is the first
program of that type ever created that will enable them make those
comparisons in an almost effortless manner.

So which is it?

[sln@netherlands.com]

Re: Programming Languages Decisions

On Mon, 18 Aug 2008 11:43:40 -0700 (PDT), gw7rib@aol.com wrote:

>On 18 Aug, 13:59, "E.D.G." <edgrs...@ix.ne tcom.comwrote:

>       This report is intended for any computer programming experts who
>would like to propose that their favorite programming language is the one
>that should be used for the potentially important application that is being
>discussed here.

>
>(snip)
>

>       I myself will be trying to convince governments etc. to use the
>program for important research work.  It is essentially a probability number
>generator.  And among other things I will be trying to get them to develop
>more accurate probability equations.  Now that several fundamental and
>crucially important physics discoveries have been made there is almost
>unlimited room for improvement.  That work should be fairly easy for
>government and university researchers and perhaps even independent
>researchers once they have the original program.  They will be able to add
>their own equations and subroutines to it and use it to test their theories
>and data.

>
>(snip)
>

>       The first application enables government, university, and independent
>researchers to compare earthquakes with one another and in the process learn
>how they are being triggered.  As far as I am aware, this is the first
>program of that type ever created that will enable them make those
>comparisons in an almost effortless manner.

>
>So which is it?

I don't see the original message here or where it originates but is
Netcom still a domain?

Your crosspost has hit a Perl group though, not hardly a language to base
calculation intensive operations on.

I don't know what physics have changed (?), but unless someone has invented
some new transcendental function, existing commercial math package should work for
anything. There are a few good simulation software packages around.

I guess MatLab is a possibility as well.

If its something you want to do from scratch and need speed, all
languages resolve to assembly.
So something like a structured C/C++ based application,
or write a custom compiler for your own language.

[E.D.G.]

Re: Programming Languages Decisions

<gw7rib@aol.com wrote in message
news:6cc451a2-7a0a-4960-b8df-7595d54d24e8@34 g2000hsh.google groups.com...

So which is it?

This is an application where people will want to use the program to generate
data. They will enter numbers and look at the charts. Quite a few people
will also want to work with the original code and modify and expand the
program itself, computer programming, not just simple data generation.

Some time ago, to get things running I decided to go with Perl for a
programming language and then about a year and a half ago added Gnuplot for
graphics.

The Perl - Gnuplot application is now running fine. And I am going to be
circulating all the files etc. to other researchers. Not being a
professional programmer I am not certain if the Perl - Gnuplot combination
is the ideal choice. And my note was to ask other people if they thought
some other language or combination of programs might be better. Then if
someone asks me that I will be able to give them at least some type of
answer.

For the moment I am going ahead with the Perl - Gnuplot combination. One
advantage for people around the world is that with this combination,
everything is a free download. And if people are not interested in doing
any programming, only data processing, then they don't need to download
anything except my original program.

[E.D.G.]

Re: Programming Languages Decisions

<sln@netherland s.comwrote in message
news:e2mja4dohb eb8q3akdi4kttg6 5k8u22v7g@4ax.c om...

I don't see the original message here or where it originates but is
Netcom still a domain?

Netcom is presently one of the domains owned by Earthlink

>
Your crosspost has hit a Perl group though, not hardly a language to base
calculation intensive operations on.

Perl is fast enough for this application. There are lots of repetitive
calculations. But they are mostly simple math. And I myself am happy with
the Perl - Gnuplot combination. But other people will be starting to expand
the program with their own equations and code. And I am trying to
anticipate what languages they might want to work with.

>
I don't know what physics have changed (?), but unless someone has
invented
some new transcendental function, existing commercial math package should
work for
anything. There are a few good simulation software packages around.

By "physics discoveries" what I mean is that I have developed equations that
do a good job of showing how sun and moon gravitational forces are linked
with earthquakes etc. At the present time, most researchers do not know how
to get those types of calculations to work. For example, the most important
data appear to be related to the combination of both the sun and moon
gravities rather than the gravities of either the sun or moon by themselves.
And there are other important relationships that researchers need to take
into account while doing this type of work. Otherwise their data just look
like random numbers. When they do the right types of calculations the data
are spectacular. It is like an entierely new area of science being opened.
I don't have a fraction of the time needed to explore all of the
possibilities. That is one of the reasons I am circulating my programs to
other researchers around the world.

I guess MatLab is a possibility as well.
>
If its something you want to do from scratch and need speed, all
languages resolve to assembly.
So something like a structured C/C++ based application,
or write a custom compiler for your own language.

I myself have never done any work with the C group of languages. But from
what I have heard about people discussing them I suspect that if government
scientists decide to choose a language for this application they might go
with one of them.

[sln@netherlands.com]

Re: Programming Languages Decisions

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 01:29:59 -0500, "E.D.G." <edgrsprj@ix.ne tcom.comwrote:

><sln@netherlan ds.comwrote in message
>news:e2mja4doh beb8q3akdi4kttg 65k8u22v7g@4ax. com...
>

>I don't see the original message here or where it originates but is
>Netcom still a domain?

>
>Netcom is presently one of the domains owned by Earthlink
>

>>
>Your crosspost has hit a Perl group though, not hardly a language to base
>calculation intensive operations on.

>
>Perl is fast enough for this application. There are lots of repetitive
>calculations . But they are mostly simple math. And I myself am happy with
>the Perl - Gnuplot combination. But other people will be starting to expand
>the program with their own equations and code. And I am trying to
>anticipate what languages they might want to work with.
>

>>
>I don't know what physics have changed (?), but unless someone has
>invented
>some new transcendental function, existing commercial math package should
>work for
>anything. There are a few good simulation software packages around.

>
>By "physics discoveries" what I mean is that I have developed equations that
>do a good job of showing how sun and moon gravitational forces are linked
>with earthquakes etc. At the present time, most researchers do not know how
>to get those types of calculations to work. For example, the most important
>data appear to be related to the combination of both the sun and moon
>gravities rather than the gravities of either the sun or moon by themselves.
>And there are other important relationships that researchers need to take
>into account while doing this type of work. Otherwise their data just look
>like random numbers. When they do the right types of calculations the data
>are spectacular. It is like an entierely new area of science being opened.
>I don't have a fraction of the time needed to explore all of the
>possibilitie s. That is one of the reasons I am circulating my programs to
>other researchers around the world.
>

>I guess MatLab is a possibility as well.
>>
>If its something you want to do from scratch and need speed, all
>languages resolve to assembly.
>So something like a structured C/C++ based application,
>or write a custom compiler for your own language.

>
>I myself have never done any work with the C group of languages. But from
>what I have heard about people discussing them I suspect that if government
>scientists decide to choose a language for this application they might go
>with one of them.

Ok, obviously your not running simulations so why not use what you like,

12. ADVANCED COMPUTATION AND VISUALIZATION
Gnuplot is used for plotting in a free and open Matlab-like programming
environment called Octave.

If your looking to solve unified field theory, it may not be what you wan't.
Its got its own programming environment that most engineers are comfortable
with, what else would you you need then? There's really no way around learning
macro's for these packages, so jump right in.

Good luck

[E.D.G.]

Re: Programming Languages Decisions

<sln@netherland s.comwrote in message
news:fuhma4h2lq q92hqkgoduu3ak7 514hcc13c@4ax.c om...

If your looking to solve unified field theory, it may not be what you
wan't.
Its got its own programming environment that most engineers are
comfortable
with, what else would you you need then? There's really no way around
learning
macro's for these packages, so jump right in.

As I stated in the original post in this thread, I thought that it might be
a good idea to have this discussion in the Newsgroups before the program I
have developed was released for circulation. And it does look like it was
in fact a good idea.

The first version is up and running. The program and support files were
sent in a zip file to a research colleague who was able to get it running
immediately on his computer. The information exchange mechanism between
Perl and Gnuplot being used is a little complex. But it appears to work.

If the program is as popular as I believe it will be then it will likely be
fairly important to get some type of "pipe" running between Perl and Gnuplot
instead of having them exchange information through files. If there are
hundreds or thousands of people or more using some program it would probably
be a good idea for it to have as stable a structure as possible.

[sln@netherlands.com]

Re: Programming Languages Decisions

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:52:37 -0500, "E.D.G." <edgrsprj@ix.ne tcom.comwrote:

><sln@netherlan ds.comwrote in message
>news:fuhma4h2l qq92hqkgoduu3ak 7514hcc13c@4ax. com...
>

>If your looking to solve unified field theory, it may not be what you
>wan't.
>Its got its own programming environment that most engineers are
>comfortable
>with, what else would you you need then? There's really no way around
>learning
>macro's for these packages, so jump right in.

>
>As I stated in the original post in this thread, I thought that it might be
>a good idea to have this discussion in the Newsgroups before the program I
>have developed was released for circulation. And it does look like it was
>in fact a good idea.
>
>The first version is up and running. The program and support files were
>sent in a zip file to a research colleague who was able to get it running
>immediately on his computer. The information exchange mechanism between
>Perl and Gnuplot being used is a little complex. But it appears to work.
>
>If the program is as popular as I believe it will be then it will likely be
>fairly important to get some type of "pipe" running between Perl and Gnuplot
>instead of having them exchange information through files. If there are
>hundreds or thousands of people or more using some program it would probably
>be a good idea for it to have as stable a structure as possible.
>

I'm sure your program will be embraced by your community.

Stable however, implies longevity. There is a littany of problems
surrounding the wrapping of code around free software, and the interfaces
they provide.

Those thousands are your intellectual customers. When upgrades happen, all
the way from the platform, up several steps, customers get irritated when
things don't go right. Interrest quickly wane's.

Your important discovery could be distributed via intellectual dissemination.
Have you thought of that? Let that proof be resolved and continued with
current technologies. Software is an after thought.

By the way, software is disposable, immediately replacable. Developers actions
include no more than 6 month's of expectancy of any technology.
Corporations know this, %70 of upgrades are because of platform/API upgrades,
what thier code base rides on. And the harness to make that happen is tremendous.
They never stop as well. To stop, is to lose.

Don't get into the mode of chasing your tail, because it will consume you.


sln

[E.D.G.]

Re: Programming Languages Decisions

<sln@netherland s.comwrote in message
news:8n2pa4dums m2oogahgqgc95jc 66u3i64gq@4ax.c om...

>
Those thousands are your intellectual customers. When upgrades happen, all
the way from the platform, up several steps, customers get irritated when
things don't go right. Interrest quickly wane's.
>

As stated in an earlier post, this application is intended to provide
researchers with invaluable information regarding earthquakes and how they
might be forecast. If it is as successful as I believe it should be then
people around the world interested in this science will begin moving the
effort forward.

I believe that this actually happened after the technology was discussed at
a disaster mitigation conference in the People's Republic of China in
December of 2003. Researchers in that country started developing their own
applications. However I am guessing that they were unable to get any
funding for their work and it eventually came to a halt.

The situation is now different. This program is all people need to do some
pretty advanced research. They won't need support from a university or
government agency, just a moderately powerful computer. It runs a little
too slow for an older computer.