Sign up ×
Mathematica Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Mathematica. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I am trying to generate C code for some functions, which I do not post in full because they are a few hundred lines long. The functions do nothing too fancy: a bunch of dot products, powers and roots.

Still, when compiling to C code Mathematica sticks in some unwanted dependency on its own libraries, which is not acceptable for the use case in question. The functions I am trying to compile have 5 arguments, 4 of which are 3-dimensional vectors.

The compile printout of one of them can be found here. As you can see, there are 3 Mathematica functions being pulled in: DotVV, Power and Internal`ReciprocalSqrt. Is there any way I can get rid of these without modifying the code manually?

Edit: here is the code I am using to compile the function

Compile[{{pos, _Real, 1} , {a, _Real, 1}, {v, _Real, 1}, {ba, _Real, 
    1} , {V, _Real}} , 
  xSol, CompilationTarget -> "C"];
share|improve this question
Can you whittle down your code and output to something that will fit in the Q? That would make it self-contained and easier to work with. – Yves Klett Jul 4 '14 at 5:33
Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately how I get to xSol is quite complicated and requires some lengthy evaluations. As for the compiled code, I would not know how to shrink it. I have, however, included the call I am making to Compile, hoping that it helps. – em70 Jul 4 '14 at 5:47
The outlook of reverse-engineering compiled code may not get you many takers. Providing code (e.g. in a linked notebook) would make the task easier, e.g. by identification of functions that do not compile, see. eg. List of compilable functions. – Yves Klett Jul 4 '14 at 6:01
I do not expect anybody to reverse-engineer the code. That is just posted for reference. The point is that I have a huge expression which is, at its essence, just a large sum of the values of applications of the functions I listed in my question. Moreover, all of those are compilable, hence the question. I wonder if the fact that there is no size constraint on the vectors is the issue (how could Mathematica know that they are 3d otherwise?) – em70 Jul 4 '14 at 6:10
@emaster70 I meant: this is an example that produces DotVV. As your question is posed, we'd need to come up with code that produces Internal`ReciprocalSqrt, DotVV and Power when compiled, solve the problem, then report to you. You could help by providing an example of problematic code. This is what I have been trying to hint at, but... – acl Jul 4 '14 at 14:14

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.