End of article 40832 (of 40834) -- what next? [npq] sci.math.num-analysis #40807 (25 + 315 more)                [1]+-[1]--[1]--[1]
From: "Dmitry" <3566.g23@g23.relcom.ru>                        \-[1]--[1]
Newsgroups: alt.math.recreational,can.schoolnet.math.jr,
+           can.schoolnet.math.sr,sci.math,sci.math.num-analysis,sci.math.
+           symbolic,sci.stat.math
[1] Fast Fourier Transform
Date: Thu Mar 12 14:37:38 EST 1998
Hello!
Can anyone tell me how to  make a Fast Fourier Transform in a program. I
understand more or less how this method works, but I cannot make an
algorythm to calculate this in a progam.
I'd appreciate any help or advice.
Please answer by email.
--
Origin:      ...
ICQ 1973408
End of article 40807 (of 40834) -- what next? [npq] sci.math.num-analysis #40814 (24 + 315 more)                (1)+-[1]--[1]--[1]
From: "Clifford J. Nelson" <nelsoncj@gte.net>                  \-[1]--[1]
[1] Re: Fast Fourier Transform
Date: Thu Mar 12 21:33:43 EST 1998
See:
<li><a href="http://www.deene.ufu.br/clean/clean1.html">
 for a Clean language (6 inches of code) FFT.</a><br>
  Cliff Nelson
End of article 40833 (of 40834) -- what next? [npq] sci.math.num-analysis #40811 (21 + 315 more)                (1)+-(1)--(1)--(1)
From: stevenj@alum.mit.edu (Steven G. Johnson)                 \-[1]--[1]
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.math.num-analysis
[1] Re: Fast Fourier Transform
Date: Thu Mar 12 23:01:11 EST 1998
For a basic introduction to the simplest FFT algorithm, the on-line
Numerical Recipes book is a good source.  For a serious implementation,
though you'll have to consult the print literature; C. S. Burrus has
collected a decent bibliography.  Links to both of these can be found at:
<li><a href="http://theory.lcs.mit.edu/~fftw/fft-links.html">
fft-links </a><br>
Unless you are a student, however, there is little reason to write your own
FFT.  There are plenty of fine implementations available for free on-line,
and you will be hard-pressed to beat the best of them with your own code.
Cordially,
Steven G. Johnson
PS. It is bad manners to post to so many newsgroups--find one or two that
are appropriate.  It is also considered rude to request email replies--if
you aren't willing to read a newsgroup, you shouldn't expect others to read
your post.
End of article 40811 (of 40834) -- what next? [npq] sci.math.num-analysis #40825 (20 + 315 more)                (1)+-(1)--(1)--(1)
From: ullrich@math.okstate.edu                                 \-(1)--[1]
Newsgroups: sci.math,sci.math.num-analysis
[1] Re: Fast Fourier Transform
Date: Fri Mar 13 14:17:50 EST 1998
         Hmm, maybe "If all you want to do is calculate Fourier
transforms efficiently there is little reason to write your own
FFT" would be better?
         I've written a few FFT routines myself, knowing very well that
I could easily find free code that would give faster performance.
The point being I wanna know how it works - some time when I want to
do something that sort of works the same way but doesn't quite do the
that's been optimized into incomprehensibility (ie inconprehensible
to me - doesn't take much.)
         OK, maybe that makes me a "student" - never mind.
David C. Ullrich
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
End of article 40825 (of 40834) -- what next? [npq] sci.math.num-analysis #40806 (19 + 315 more)                          [1]--[1]
End of article 40806 (of 40834) -- what next? [npq] sci.math.num-analysis #40808 (18 + 315 more)                          (1)--[1]
From: "Dann Corbit" <dcorbit@solutionsiq.com>
[1] Re: Fast Fourier transform?
Date: Thu Mar 12 20:00:33 EST 1998
You did not say if you wanted FORTRAN or C or what?
You might like to start 
<li><a href="http://www.jjj.de/">
here:</a><br>
--
Hypertext C-FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
C-FAQ ftp: ftp://rtfm.mit.edu, C-FAQ Book: ISBN 0-201-84519-9
Try "C Programming: A Modern Approach" ISBN 0-393-96945-2
Want Software?  Algorithms?  Pubs? http://www.infoseek.com
End of article 40808 (of 40834) -- what next? [npq] sci.math.num-analysis #40802 (17 + 315 more)                          [1]+-[1]