Prev: Bus error/ segmentation fault--help?
Next: Problem linking Intel Math Kernel Library
From: Steve Lionel on 3 Nov 2006 15:44
Gary Scott wrote:

> I just meant that it needs to come included with the compiler.
> Something included, that works on all platforms that you provide
> compilers for, so that the source is fully portable across those
> platforms, including the graphics. You shouldn't provide something like
> quickwin on just one platform (no I don't think quickwin is the right
> solution, it could be done better). I don't care which one you select
> necessarily, whether open source or home grown or commercial as long as
> it has a well designed base functionality. I want a complete, tailored
> development environment (ok, I want the world).

How much extra would you be willing to pay for this? How much extra do
you think most other compiler buyers would be willing to pay to have
this capability included? What other sorts of development items (such
as F2003 features) would you be willing to trade off for this? Can you
point to other commercial Fortran compiler vendors offering such a
thing? What about compilers for other languages?

Just trying to do the due diligence thing here...

Steve

From: Paul van Delst on 3 Nov 2006 16:41
Steve Lionel wrote:
> Gary Scott wrote:
>
>> I just meant that it needs to come included with the compiler.
>> Something included, that works on all platforms that you provide
>> compilers for, so that the source is fully portable across those
>> platforms, including the graphics. You shouldn't provide something like
>> quickwin on just one platform (no I don't think quickwin is the right
>> solution, it could be done better). I don't care which one you select
>> necessarily, whether open source or home grown or commercial as long as
>> it has a well designed base functionality. I want a complete, tailored
>> development environment (ok, I want the world).
>
> How much extra would you be willing to pay for this? How much extra do
> you think most other compiler buyers would be willing to pay to have
> this capability included? What other sorts of development items (such
> as F2003 features) would you be willing to trade off for this? Can you
> point to other commercial Fortran compiler vendors offering such a
> thing? What about compilers for other languages?

Just my 2cents worth.....

In any one day I compile/test the same/similar code on about 4 different systems:
PC/RHE4.0 linux with g95 and lahey f95 6.2d,
Mac/OSX with g95 and intel ifort 9.1
IBM SP/AIX5.2 with xlf95 v8.1
IBM SP/AIX5.3 with xlf95 v10.1

All this code (compiled with the same makefiles) spits out datafiles which I then display,
as required, with IDL. My code repository is linked to all the above platforms so,
depending on where I am, I could feasibly be developing/debugging the exact same
code/file, building it, running it, and then displaying the datafiles using the same IDL
code (which might also need development/debugging) on any of these platforms at different
times on the same day.

Maybe I don't understand the concept but an integrated development environment (apart from
my dependence on *nix) seems nigh impossible AFAICT. I reckon I'm almost as portable as I
can be with Fortran95(free->$$), netCDF(free), and IDL($$$->sign away your first born). A
particular compiler vendor touting a you beaut, Holden ute IDE doesn't mean a thing to me.
I'd much rather spend money on, as SteveL alluded to, a full-blown F2003 compiler[*].
There's just no way a compiler vendor is going to produce a package that allows me to
prototype code and/or view/manipulate output like I can already do with a package like IDL
(or matlab, or <insert fave tool here>)

cheers,

paulv

[*] to any compiler vendor-y folks out there reading this, especially for the above
systems, I'm lying awake at night dreaming of the day..... :o) It's nearly 2007....

--
Paul van Delst Ride lots.
CIMSS @ NOAA/NCEP/EMC Eddy Merckx
Ph: (301)763-8000 x7748
Fax:(301)763-8545
From: beliavsky on 3 Nov 2006 16:44
Steve Lionel wrote:
> Gary Scott wrote:
>
> > I just meant that it needs to come included with the compiler.
> > Something included, that works on all platforms that you provide
> > compilers for, so that the source is fully portable across those
> > platforms, including the graphics. You shouldn't provide something like
> > quickwin on just one platform (no I don't think quickwin is the right
> > solution, it could be done better). I don't care which one you select
> > necessarily, whether open source or home grown or commercial as long as
> > it has a well designed base functionality. I want a complete, tailored
> > development environment (ok, I want the world).
>
> How much extra would you be willing to pay for this? How much extra do
> you think most other compiler buyers would be willing to pay to have
> this capability included? What other sorts of development items (such
> as F2003 features) would you be willing to trade off for this?

I vote for Fortran 2003 features over a cross-platform GUI.

I write internal software to test trading strategies at a money
management firm. The output is written to CSV files that the manager
can open in Excel, and using the "system" extension found in IVF and
other compilers, graphs can be displayed using Gnuplot. Things were
similar at the previous financial job I held, except I used Python with
Numeric. The manager does not care if the program runs from the command
line, as long as it makes money. When he does want a GUI, Quickwin
should be fine, or we can buy a 3rd party GUI library. We don't care
about Linux or OS X. Even if Intel did have a cross-platform GUI, I
would be reluctant to rely too much on it, because I develop mostly
with g95. I'd guess that many people writing shrinkwrapped software for
Windows are comfortable with the .NET tools and can combine them with
Fortran to build GUIs.

IVF is very slow at compiling compared to g95, gfortran, Lahey/Fujitsu,
Salford. I'd like to see that addressed.

From: Richard Maine on 3 Nov 2006 16:51
Steve Lionel <steve.lionel(a)intel.com> wrote:

> Gary Scott wrote:
>
> > I just meant that it needs to come included with the compiler.

> How much extra would you be willing to pay for this? How much extra do
> you think most other compiler buyers would be willing to pay to have
> this capability included?

Exactly my thought when I saw that. If you want it as an optional
(presumably extra cost) add-on that you nicely integrate with and make a
handy single line item on a purchase request, that's fine. (Sort of like
you do now with the IMSL stuff - maybe part of a "super-professional"
package or whatever the market droids would want to call it). But if
Gary is saying that he wants you to force me to pay extra because of
what he wants in your compiler, well... I think you can imagine from the
way I describe it what I'd have to say about that.

And if he thinks that it will be included for no extra cost, well...
might as well throw in a few other dreams as well. Can you add in world
peace too? :-(

--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
From: Gary Scott on 3 Nov 2006 19:20
Steve Lionel wrote:
> Gary Scott wrote:
>
>
>>I just meant that it needs to come included with the compiler.
>>Something included, that works on all platforms that you provide
>>compilers for, so that the source is fully portable across those
>>platforms, including the graphics. You shouldn't provide something like
>>quickwin on just one platform (no I don't think quickwin is the right
>>solution, it could be done better). I don't care which one you select
>>necessarily, whether open source or home grown or commercial as long as
>>it has a well designed base functionality. I want a complete, tailored
>>development environment (ok, I want the world).
>
>
> How much extra would you be willing to pay for this? How much extra do
> you think most other compiler buyers would be willing to pay to have
> this capability included? What other sorts of development items (such
> as F2003 features) would you be willing to trade off for this? Can you
> point to other commercial Fortran compiler vendors offering such a
> thing? What about compilers for other languages?

Well, I buy two copies of the full GINO every time they update, so quite
a bit. I can't speak for others, only myself.

>
> Just trying to do the due diligence thing here...
>
> Steve
>


--

Gary Scott
mailto:garylscott(a)sbcglobal dot net

Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com

Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org
-OR-
Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html

Why are there two? God only knows.


If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows
it can't be done.

-- Henry Ford
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Bus error/ segmentation fault--help?
Next: Problem linking Intel Math Kernel Library