feat: add initial implementaion of `fft/base/fftpack` #4121

gunjjoshi · 2024-12-21T05:52:14Z

Progresses #3131

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

adds fft/base/fftpack.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request:

progresses [RFC]: signal process related algorithms like fft family #3131.

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

@stdlib-js/reviewers

Signed-off-by: Gunj Joshi <gunjjoshi8372@gmail.com>

lib/node_modules/@stdlib/fft/base/fftpack/lib/passfb.js

Signed-off-by: Gunj Joshi <gunjjoshi8372@gmail.com>

--- type: pre_push_report description: Results of running various checks prior to pushing changes. report: - task: run_javascript_examples status: na - task: run_c_examples status: na - task: run_cpp_examples status: na - task: run_javascript_readme_examples status: na - task: run_c_benchmarks status: na - task: run_cpp_benchmarks status: na - task: run_fortran_benchmarks status: na - task: run_javascript_benchmarks status: na - task: run_julia_benchmarks status: na - task: run_python_benchmarks status: na - task: run_r_benchmarks status: na - task: run_javascript_tests status: na ---

gunjjoshi · 2025-01-19T03:30:23Z

I had a confusion here. If we see the reference implementations of cosqf and cosqf1, cosqf calls cosqf1 here, and passes pointers to the wsave arrays, as cosqf1 accepts pointers to that array.
But in the current JS implementation in this PR, I am passing a single element of the array here, while cosqf1 takes an entire array as an argument here. This might not be the right approach. Is there any other way to achieve the same behavior as shown in the reference C implementation?

gunjjoshi · 2025-01-19T03:45:52Z

Should I follow something like what we are doing in the C and JS implementations of modf?

kgryte · 2025-01-19T09:39:01Z

@gunjjoshi It's a little hard to follow what you are asking given the various links. Can you provide relevant snippets in a single comment so we can see what you are referencing in one view?

gunjjoshi · 2025-01-19T11:25:45Z

@kgryte Ahh, sorry for the confusion.

This is the cosqf1 function:

static void cosqf1(integer n, real *x, real *w, real *xh)

This cosqf1 is used within the cosqf function as:

cosqf1(n, &x[1], &wsave[1], &wsave[n + 1]);

In order to replicate this same behavior in JS, currently, what I'm doing is:

cosqf1:

function cosqf1( n, x, w, xh )

where n is a number, while x, w and xh are Float64Arrays.

And, while calling this cosqf1 from cosqf, we are currently using it as:

cosqf1( n, x[ 1 - 1 ], wsave[ 1 - 1 ], wsave[ n + 1 - 1 ] );

But in this JS version, instead of passing arrays, I am currently passing single elements, such as wsave[ n + 1 - 1 ].
This seems to be wrong. Is there any other way of passing arrays here, but from a specific index (something like a subarray)?

I think this problem might be summed up as, how should we replicate the logic of passing subarrays (using pointers) in C, for the JS implementation?

kgryte · 2025-01-19T23:00:54Z

@gunjjoshi What about providing an array and then offsets, similar in concept to the ndarray APIs we have. E.g.,

xptr = ...;
wptr = ...;
xhptr = ...;

cosqf1(n, x, xptr, wsave, wptr, xhptr ); // =>cosqf1( n: number, x: Float64Array, xptr: number, wsave: Float64Array, wptr: number, xhptr: number )

where the *ptr variables are indices into the respective arrays.

Another alternative is that you pass down slices which has more overhead due to object creation.

cosqf1( n, x.slice( 1 ), wsave.slice( 1 ), wsave.slice( n+1 ) )

gunjjoshi · 2025-01-21T01:06:38Z

Thanks, @kgryte, I'll go with the first method!

--- type: pre_push_report description: Results of running various checks prior to pushing changes. report: - task: run_javascript_examples status: na - task: run_c_examples status: na - task: run_cpp_examples status: na - task: run_javascript_readme_examples status: na - task: run_c_benchmarks status: na - task: run_cpp_benchmarks status: na - task: run_fortran_benchmarks status: na - task: run_javascript_benchmarks status: na - task: run_julia_benchmarks status: na - task: run_python_benchmarks status: na - task: run_r_benchmarks status: na - task: run_javascript_tests status: na ---

gunjjoshi · 2025-02-20T04:10:20Z

The required functions are implemented now, will move on to testing the implementations locally, comparing with the reference ones and then creating the tests.

kgryte · 2025-02-20T04:32:28Z

The required functions are implemented now, will move on to testing the implementations locally, comparing with the reference ones and then creating the tests.

Great! Thanks for your continued work on this!

gunjjoshi · 2025-02-22T03:10:07Z

@kgryte For the tests, should we have the tests for all functions in a single test.js file, or should we keep them separate, such as test.rffti.js, test.cosqb.js, etc.? The functions that would be tested are mentioned here: https://github.com/marton78/pffft/blob/master/fftpack.c#L2710

kgryte · 2025-02-22T03:49:16Z

@gunjjoshi Let's try in separate files to start.

--- type: pre_push_report description: Results of running various checks prior to pushing changes. report: - task: run_javascript_examples status: na - task: run_c_examples status: na - task: run_cpp_examples status: na - task: run_javascript_readme_examples status: na - task: run_c_benchmarks status: na - task: run_cpp_benchmarks status: na - task: run_fortran_benchmarks status: na - task: run_javascript_benchmarks status: na - task: run_julia_benchmarks status: na - task: run_python_benchmarks status: na - task: run_r_benchmarks status: na - task: run_javascript_tests status: passed ---

stdlib-bot · 2025-03-05T06:22:17Z

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
fft/base/fftpack	$\color{red}358/360$ $\color{green}+99.44\%$	$\color{red}22/23$ $\color{green}+95.65\%$	$\color{green}3/3$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{red}358/360$ $\color{green}+99.44\%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

gunjjoshi added 6 commits December 14, 2024 14:42

feat: implement passfb

b6c3ed7

feat: add passb2

7479095

feat: add passb2

2f134a6

feat: add passb3

3b5b05d

feat: add passb4 function

9606e3e

docs: update index.js

825ca7f

gunjjoshi marked this pull request as draft December 21, 2024 05:52

stdlib-bot added Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. and removed Needs Review A pull request which needs code review. labels Dec 21, 2024

gunjjoshi changed the title ~~feat: add initial implementtaion of fft/base/fftpack~~ feat: add initial implementaion of fft/base/fftpack Dec 21, 2024

gunjjoshi added 3 commits December 21, 2024 11:23

Update main.c

b3a1fff

Signed-off-by: Gunj Joshi <gunjjoshi8372@gmail.com>

Update main.c

d793f7f

Signed-off-by: Gunj Joshi <gunjjoshi8372@gmail.com>

Update c2_ref.js

82bc096

Signed-off-by: Gunj Joshi <gunjjoshi8372@gmail.com>

kgryte added the Feature Issue or pull request for adding a new feature. label Dec 21, 2024

kgryte reviewed Dec 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

lib/node_modules/@stdlib/fft/base/fftpack/lib/passfb.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

kgryte reviewed Dec 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

lib/node_modules/@stdlib/fft/base/fftpack/lib/passfb.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

gunjjoshi added 14 commits December 23, 2024 11:14

docs: update parameter descriptions, disable eslint max len at top level

d74a322

docs: update parameter descriptions, disable eslint max len at top level

a2bb8d4

feat: add passfb5.js

e9c30a7

docs: add eslint comment

3eac426

feat: add passf2, passf3

80a4f21

Update main.c

d978c43

Signed-off-by: Gunj Joshi <gunjjoshi8372@gmail.com>

feat: add passf4

b6ced12

docs: remove spaces before parenthesis, update variable names

29f463a

docs: remove unused import

0aa98e5

gunjjoshi added 6 commits January 15, 2025 07:10

feat: add cfftfi, cffti, decompose, update cfftf

3b2c9de

feat: add rfftb, rfftb1, rfftf1

16f8a67

feat: add rfftb, rfftb1, rfftf1

f20933d

feat: add rfftf, rfftfi, rffti1

ef1b5b2

docs: disable eslint max-len

aa4008b

feat: add cosqb, cosqb1, cosqf, cosqf1

59b47ae

gunjjoshi added 7 commits January 21, 2025 06:58

refactor: use offsets along with arrays in cosqf1 and cosqf

712e412

docs: add eslint comment

535cf96

refactor: use array offsets in functions

2c6ee27

refactor: use offset variables for arrays

83f0f00

refactor: use offset variables for arrays

c7badd6

refactor: add offsets, use sincos

adeb99a

feat: add cosqi, add eslint comments

b864168

kgryte mentioned this pull request Feb 15, 2025

[Idea]: provide APIs for computing Fast Fourier Transforms stdlib-js/google-summer-of-code#3

Open

gunjjoshi added 2 commits March 2, 2025 13:42

test: add initial test for rffti

8189014

gunjjoshi added 2 commits March 26, 2025 11:41

test: add test.rfftf.js

02eabb0

test: use correct implementation of tests, improve implementation

474def9

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: add initial implementaion of `fft/base/fftpack` #4121

feat: add initial implementaion of `fft/base/fftpack` #4121

gunjjoshi commented Dec 21, 2024

gunjjoshi commented Jan 19, 2025

gunjjoshi commented Jan 19, 2025

kgryte commented Jan 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

gunjjoshi commented Jan 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

kgryte commented Jan 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

gunjjoshi commented Jan 21, 2025

gunjjoshi commented Feb 20, 2025

kgryte commented Feb 20, 2025

gunjjoshi commented Feb 22, 2025

kgryte commented Feb 22, 2025

stdlib-bot commented Mar 5, 2025

feat: add initial implementaion of fft/base/fftpack #4121

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat: add initial implementaion of fft/base/fftpack #4121

Conversation

gunjjoshi commented Dec 21, 2024

Description

Related Issues

Questions

Other

Checklist

gunjjoshi commented Jan 19, 2025

gunjjoshi commented Jan 19, 2025

kgryte commented Jan 19, 2025 • edited Loading

gunjjoshi commented Jan 19, 2025 • edited Loading

kgryte commented Jan 19, 2025 • edited Loading

gunjjoshi commented Jan 21, 2025

gunjjoshi commented Feb 20, 2025

kgryte commented Feb 20, 2025

gunjjoshi commented Feb 22, 2025

kgryte commented Feb 22, 2025

stdlib-bot commented Mar 5, 2025

Coverage Report

feat: add initial implementaion of `fft/base/fftpack` #4121

feat: add initial implementaion of `fft/base/fftpack` #4121

kgryte commented Jan 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

gunjjoshi commented Jan 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

kgryte commented Jan 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading