From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: <9fans@9fans.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 06:07:33 -0600 From: EBo In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8f46b210f655183b56d52e5737ace865@swcp.com> User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.4-trunk Subject: Re: [9fans] Modern development language for Plan 9, WAS: Re: RESOLVED: recoving important header file rudely Topicbox-Message-UUID: aa57326a-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 10:38:30 +0000, C H Forsyth wrote: > it's not just the FORTRAN but supporting libraries, sometimes large > ones, > including ones in C++, are often required as well. i'd concluded that > cross-compilation was currently the only effective route. > i hadn't investigated whether something like linuxemu could be > used (or extended easily enough) to allow cross-compilation within > the plan 9 environment. > > i have found a few exceptions written in plain, reasonably portable > C, good for my purposes, > but not characteristic of scientific applications in general. Agreed, and then there is the Netlib Java numerical analysis code -- That one gave be indigestion... One of the biggest problems is that no one wants rewrite linpack, blas, etc., not that it has been polished within an inch of the developers lives. As for FORTRAN, I thought about looking into the old f2c, and see how that worked for getting some FORTRAN compiled in Plan 9 as a demonstration. I'll think about linuxemu in this context. EBo --