Hello Brijesh, To me, scilab2c for 5.5.2 works in its limited functional scope. For sysdiag or any other complex function is suggest you to define types / sizes in a dynamic way using a scilab function to compute them from inputs rather than implementing a mapping table (as it is currently done).
FYI scilab2c does not seems to work on Scilab 6.0.0 (at least last time I checked). Thanks, -- Clément Le dimanche 10 septembre 2017 à 12:17 +0530, brijesh guptacr a écrit : > Hello, > > Brijesh here. Abhinav and I work together on Scilab2c. > > 1)Will a completely rewritten scilab2c in 5.5.2 solve the issues we are > facing? > > 2) Can you please explain in a little more detail as to how the suggested > approach works in Scilab > 6 and why not in 5.5.2. > > 3)Would switching from 5.5.2 to 6 help us? > > Sysdiag, orth, pca and svd to name a few functions that are problematic. > > With Regards, > Brijesh Gupta C R > > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Clément David <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hello Abhinav, > > > > Nice to have someone interested in scilab2c. Currently there is no active > > maintainer, feel free > > to > > contribute to it. > > > > > 1) To write a new function, we always have to decide the output sizes > > > according to scalar > > inputs > > > or size of input matrix. But, if our output size depends on an element > > > which is a part of > > matrix, > > > what can we do to assign the output size accordingly. > > > > The current code generation need a C-like arguments representation for the > > Scilab function to > > generate the good corresponding C function call. If you wish to have a more > > dynamic behavior to > > define the outputs argument you should probably need to > > serialize/deserialize them in some way > > to a > > raw vector. > > > > > 2) There are few functions whose output size has no relation to input > > > matrix sizes, or they > > don't > > > follow any regular pattern. For example, they depend on rank of input > > > matrix or something > > else. > > > For such functions, is there any work around to estimate the size first > > > and assign accordingly > > in > > > the Tool Initialisation part. > > > > No currently in the Scilab2C code and with my limited understanding, there > > is no way to compute > > the > > number of / size of the arguments. This approach however is fully valid and > > is partially > > implemented > > in the Scilab 6 analysis pass. A completely rewritten Scilab2C could then > > use the propagated > > size / > > types constraints to handle theses dynamic functions. Could you give me a > > function you wish to > > add ? > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > Clément > > _______________________________________________ > > users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users _______________________________________________ users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
