Timeline for Portable makefile for wscc builds
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 12:00 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 143 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 11:08 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 60 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 10:55 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 853 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 10:50 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 853 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 10:44 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 853 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 10:39 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 853 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 10:29 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2853 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:37 | comment | added | Szabolcs |
@innisfree Something I forgot: I know that the documentation says that "MathLink is deprecated in favour of WSTP", but that's not what it looks like in practice. For less trouble and better interoperability with other parts of Mathematica, I only use MathLink. That's what CreateExecutable from CCompileDriver will use as well, that's what you need for LibraryLink, and that's what you'll find inside of Mathematica's binaries (like MathKernel). There is absolutely no functional difference between WSTP and MathLink. Only the function names differ (WS vs ML) which makes them incompatible.
|
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:34 | vote | accept | innisfree | ||
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:34 | comment | added | Szabolcs | @innisfree Probably because it is common to have multiple versions of Mathematica installed. I've rewritten the answer. | |
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:33 | vote | accept | innisfree | ||
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:34 | |||||
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:32 | comment | added | innisfree | Thanks. sorry MATLink! Why doesn't a default linux mathematica install put these commands/header files in the usr/bin & usr/include already? wouldn't that be the best way? | |
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:32 | history | edited | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 77 characters in body
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:20 | comment | added | Szabolcs |
@innisfree Actually if yours is purely a Mathematica package, you can just have it compile automatically when the package is loaded as Needs["YourPackage`"]. Whether this is feasible depends on whether you have any hard-to-configure external dependencies (we had MATLAB for MATLink). If it's only your code, just compile from within Mathematica, and you'll be able to easily detect paths with $InstallationDirectory.
|
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:18 | comment | added | Szabolcs | @innisfree ... Linux users to do a bit more work to set up a package than Windows or Mac users. On Windows and Mac we provide precompiled binaries for MATLink (which is much easier to do on those platforms than on Linux). | |
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:17 | comment | added | Szabolcs |
@innisfree It's MATLink. MathLink is the old name of WSTP. What you are linking to is Linux-specific, and doesn't even work across all Linux systems. (What if it's called wolfram instead of math? What if Mathematica is not in the PATH? What if multiple versions are in the PATH under different names?) It's the best we could do, and the installation instructions of MATLink tell people to edit the Makefile manually when needed. It's the nature of Linux that it's hard to make thing robust and foolproof ... but for the same reason it's not unreasonable to expect ...
|
|
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:13 | comment | added | innisfree | Thanks. In mathlink, I found the bash attempts to do it: github.com/rsmenon/MATLink/blob/develop/MATLink/Engine/src/… | |
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:11 | vote | accept | innisfree | ||
| Aug 28, 2017 at 9:13 | |||||
| Aug 28, 2017 at 8:51 | history | answered | Szabolcs | CC BY-SA 3.0 |