English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

I have been us ing APL as a "b readboard ing" tool for deve lop ing a model o f acous t ic percept ion . I use A P L because its a r r a y s t r u c t u r e fits ideally wi th my concep t t ha t neura l signal p rocess ing of acous t i c s ignals in the neura l pa thways wi th in and above the coch lea is based on a h i e r a r c h y of ou te r p r o d u c t p a t t e r n r ecogn i t i on funct ions on arrays , r a t h e r t h a n the conven t iona l Four i e r methods. Unt i l r e c e n t l y , I accep ted the re la t ive ly s l ow signal p roce s s ing speed of the APL i n t e r p r e t e r as a t radeoff for its ope ra t iona l advan tages in explor ing various aspec ts o f the theory . Recent ly , however , I have deve loped a form of the sys tem t h a t adheres to the c o n t i n u o u s rea l t ime r e q u i r e m e n t s of a t rue model o f hear ing . This model has the po ten t ia l to d e m o n s t r a t e rea l t ime capabi l i ty t h r o u g h the use o f compi led languages . However , to do resea rch , I also need A P L to have the abi l i ty to focus on systern des ign ins tead o f be ing submerged in programruing detai ls . Ideally, the answer to this d i lemma would be to develop func t ions in APL and t r ans la t e t h e m e i t h e r to assemble r or C. So, how many APL p r o g r a m m e r s are f luent in C? Not me! Fur ther more the dogwork and de lay o f t r ans la t ion would be e x t r e m e l y expensive . The re fo re , when I hea rd of Wai-Mee Ching 's APL-to-C t r ans la to r , I eager ly cont a c t ed h im at IBM Watson Labora to r ies . As a "Be t a t e s t e r " on his COMPC t rans la to r , it has o c c u r r e d to me tha t my re su l t s might be o f general i n t e re s t . F i r s t of all, I found the t r an s l a to r easy to use, and whi le the i n s t ruc t i on manua l is perhaps too t i gh t ly wr i t t e n , i t covers all the points you need to know. The t r a n s l a to r i t se l f comes in a single APL workspace , and you don ' t have to know any'thing abou t C to get it runn ing . I t needs no dec la ra t ions o f va r iab les as the COMPC checks for the typeshapes o f t he var iables . And i f you have made mist akes in th i s aspec t of y o u r code, it tells you where and w h a t t hey arc. However , you must specify the type and r a n k of the inpu t var iab les of the top-level func t ion . T h e r e are vers ions o f COMPC for APL in bo th DOS and OS/2. I have been us ing the OS/2 ve r s ion wi th the ef f ic ient CSet ++ compiler . (Any o t he r 32-bit compi ler can be used.) Because my e x p e r i m e n t a l sy s t em has bccn based on Manugis t ics A P L ~ P L U S II, I have land to make a few changes in nay code so as to confo rm wi th the IBM vers ion o f A P L along wi th the r e l a t ive ly m in o r r e s t r i c t i o n s t h a t are imposed by the t r a n s l a t o r . T h e m a i n r e q u i r e m e n t s on adap t ing code to the C O M P C t r a n s l a t o r are (1) t h a t t h e r e mus t be no i n t e r n a l ne s t ed a r rays , and (2) t h a t no da ta e n t r y and o u t p u t quad funct ions are al lowed. Thus , i f needed , the assoc ia ted "bells and whis t les" mus t be coded in to C by hand. I in tend to use the D NA f ea tu re o f A P L t h a t should let me cont ro l the o p e ra t i n g e n v i r o n m e n t via A P L while still ge t t ing the ef fec t o f fast compi led C funct ions . Thus , my f i rs t ob jec t ive has been to de t e rmine wha t speed advan tage t h e r e migh t be in th is approach . To s tudy this possibi l i ty, I have r u n some exper iments on severa l typ ica l A P L func t ions o f di f fer ing cha rac t e r i s t i c s so as to compare the r u n n i n g t imes of A P L ve r sus the t r a n s l a t e d C. I should expec t t h a t the degree o f i m p r o v e m e n t depends grea t ly on the n a t u r e o f thc A P L func t ion to be t rans la ted . For example , p ro g rams invo lv ing mos t ly APL pr imit ives , w i t h o u t loops, shou ld no t show much, i f any, improvemen t , whi le a t t he o t h e r ex t reme, func t ions hav ing mul t ip le , busy loops is w h e re C should shine. My tes t s sampled this r ange o f possibli l i t ies. A n o th e r advan tage o f hav ing a conven ien t C t r an s l a to r is t h a t it could be possible to improve the r u n n i n g t ime o f loose ly-coded A P L and the reby avoid t ime spen t in op t imiz ing code. For these tests I selected the following functions:

Some observations on using Ching's APL-to-C translator