iraf.net

Hi guys! How are you?

After this catchy title I really want to discuss something really serious, which is how old and outdated IRAF's code is.

I mean, the code itself is excellent, but it was written in a completely different era and a total rewrite my be huge work but I really think that the benefits exceed the problems.

I have a plan. We should rewrite it in a modern, concurrent language, which REALLY supports modern computers and takes advantage of it. I think the best option is Rust (https://www.rust-lang.org/) that is also a open source language, safe and made by Mozilla to create the new Firefox Quantum (https://blog.rust-lang.org/2017/11/14/Fearless-Concurrency-In-Firefox-Quantum.html).

The thing is that I cannot do it alone. This is a HUGE project and help will be most accepted

So, who's in?

PS: I'm not working with IRAF anymore, since I left academy for a programming job, but I really wanted to use my knowledge of both areas to help astronomers.

PS2: I'm currently planning to do a Rust reader for FITS file, but is not even started yet.

I was curious if you had considered https://github.com/spacetelescope/pyraf as a possible front end for IRAF.

There is a version of IRAF in https://github.com/olebole/iraf-v216 that has been ported to several different machine.

Your thoughts?

Rob

---

Rob Steele (Robert.D.Steele@jpl.nasa.gov)

@migubolin,

you're right about IRAF being outdated from that point of view, but as Rob suggests pyraf is a good start in the right direction.

There is still plenty to do and as I took your suggestion on Rust serious, I have to say, changing one niche product for the other is not the way to go. This is what one wants to get rid off. They is only one way of success and that's python.

So bringing pyraf up to date version of pyraf will be the best solution because we could have gui's working on pyqt oder glade or wxpython which are plattform independant and will work on tablets, smartphone and computers as well.

Keeping things up to date is the challenge and not choosing some niche language which is hyped for some time.


cheers,
Christian

First of all, sorry for the late reply. I was starting a new job and I was dealing with all problems related to it.

@robsteele49 Yes! I've seen pyraf but not this iraf-v216, thanks for sharing
The idea to port IRAF for several systems is a good one, but I mean a complete rewrite. Well, it is something that I want to do in free time until it gets some momentum and I still need to study some stuff before start.

@ambrosc I strongly disagree and I'll try to justify it:

- First, as I said above, my idea was to complete rewrite IRAF, since its code is fundamentally outdated, which wouln't be a problem if IRAF was written in a more "modern" way to say.

- I'm disagree that Rust is a niche product, by all means. The Firefox's core is written in Rust and Mozilla is strongly supporting it (https://research.mozilla.org/rust/). There's an OS being written in Rust (https://www.redox-os.org/) and a search in Github by Rust returns \$this->_split2($m[0])30k repositories (which per se don't mean so much).

- Also, Python is a language that is starting to feel it's age: People use it a lot, but new languages succeed where it failed in terms of compilation, usability and memory control. For example, Rust and Go languages do not give the cue to programmers make mistakes with pointers, what helps A LOT for bug prevention.

- Rust is made to be reliable and have long-term support. For as long Firefox use it, we can be sure that will be supported and updated.

Just to conclude: I don't think that we should replace the original IRAF, not right now at least. But rewrite IRAF is an opportunity for expanding its functionality for other uses than astronomy, write a new and revised documentation and to force astronomy community to learn and use more modern languages and softwares.

I really think that we can't afford to lose the knowledge and work embedded in IRAF just because is "and old tool" and people can't to use it anymore due to incompatibility.

The github version I was referencing now lives at:

https://github.com/iraf-community/iraf

Rob

---

Rob Steele (Robert.D.Steele@jpl.nasa.gov)

I think getting folks on board for a complete rewrite is going to be difficult at best. But, the version of IRAF in https://github.co ism/iraf-community/iraf can be run on multiple platforms. If there is a platform you'd like to see it on, but it doesn't work on I'd suggest posting a issue to that repository.

Rob Steele

---

Rob Steele (Robert.D.Steele@jpl.nasa.gov)