Can't resist to give a quick answer to your question:
Being a physicist, I have indeed used Mathematica, though I generally prefer Maple for most stuff since I like the interface better. As you said, it is a question of the complexity of the optimization. I don't think you need the full power of Mathematica for this, though I haven't thought it through. If it's an If I recall correctly, the first reply in this thread pointed to a good, scientific discussion of the subject.
The reason I pointed at those Math:: modules was because before engaging in hairy XS/Inline::C library wrapping, it's probably a better idea to try with what's availlable already. If that's not good enough by a small margin, it's probably a better idea to extend what's on CPAN than to roll one's own. That doesn't mean I consider Mathematica an inadequate tool for the job.
Steffen
In reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Geometric Optimisation and Perl
by tsee
in thread Geometric Optimisation and Perl
by stefzody
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |