Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 From: Terence <tbwright@xxxxxxxxx>
 Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 16:20:14 0700 (PDT)
On May 29, 1:43 am, "robin" wrote:
....
 Thanks for the reference. But did they HAVE to use Fortran 77,
 in 1996?
A book of 600+ pages takes more than a few years to write.
The authors state that the book was begun about 20 years before.
Several editions have been published over the years, each edition updated..
As well as F77, they also include F90 versions.
They could well have dropped the F77 versions.
The point about using F77 in algorithms is that most nonspecialits
can better understand the processes being used, if you have at least a
good knowledge of Algebra (which was the whole thrust of the Bachus
team in dsigning Fortran; although Algol comes to mind as a familiar
alternative), or have some familiarity with Basic, if not Fortran.
Yes, you can stuff some of the basic matrix operations behind the
curtain of a later and more compact Fortran representation, with
Matrix builtin operations and fewr labels to trace, but part of the
reason for recipes is to show the how and why (the cookery book theme
is appropriate).
.
 FollowUps:
 References:
 Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 From: Daniel Carrera
 Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 From: robin
 Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 From: nmm1
 Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 From: robin
 Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 Prev by Date: Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 Next by Date: Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 Previous by thread: Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 Next by thread: Re: Recommend an alternative to Numerical Recipes?
 Index(es):
Relevant Pages
