On Sun, 14 Jun 2020, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
Am 14.06.20 um 12:25 schrieb Henning Thielemann:
This would still be helpful. Imagine we transcode LAPACK to Haskell. It would be still FORTRAN or C encoded in Haskell with the same old FORTRAN API, but we can easily generalize the code to any floating point number type that any Haskell library provides, e.g. numbers with extended precision, with decimal numbers or with interval arithmetics.
So... I tend to be scared if somebody claims to generalize floating-point code. Either because that person knows too little, or because that person knows so much more than me that they actually know how to deal with these complications :-)
I expect that code that works for both Float and Double has already factored out precision-dependent constants. I have not claimed and do not expect that generalization can happen automatically. I just say that even a dumb conversion from FORTRAN to Haskell can be the first step to (manual) generalization in Haskell.