Scilab installation

ripatti · March 27, 2006, 7:14am

Hi!

Has anybody tried to install Dynare’s scilab version? Scilab (4.0) does not contain uplib() command that is needed to run according to installation instructions.

I just wanted to try to experiment with scilab version.

Antti

MichelJuillard · March 27, 2006, 7:27am

Hi Antti,

the binaries are probably not compatible with Scilab version 4.0. I will post new install instructions. By the way uplib() is part of Dynare, not Scilab.

Best

Michel

MichelJuillard · March 31, 2006, 12:44pm

With Scilab version 4.0, it is necessary to add the following steps to redo the binaries. At the Scilab prompt, execute the followin commands:

cd c:\dynare\scilab
getf(‘uplib.sci’)
uplib()

It may be necessary to reload Scilab for the modifications to take effect.

Best

Michel

cdshikida · September 24, 2006, 1:10pm

Dear Mr. Michel.

I had the same problem and with the new instructions, it worked to me. But the example1.mod of scilab couldn’t run. I wrote: “cd:/dynare/examples” and even with this , the program gave wrong answers.

In order to make it clear, here is the copy-and-pasted:

->

–>scipad(‘C:\dynare\examples\example1.mod’);

–> sci =

…/…/
Can’t go to directory lib
chdir lib
!–error 998
chdir: Internal Error
at line 17 of exec file called by :
exec(“C:/Program Files/scilab-4.0/examples/interface-general/builder.sce”);
in execstr instruction called by :
scipad(‘C:\dynare\examples\example1.mod’);

–>cd c:\dynare\examples
ans =

c:\dynare\examples

–>dynare example1.mod

Warning :redefining function: beta

Warning :redefining function: beta
inside function: example1_fff

Warning :redefining function: beta
inside function: example1_fff
[More (y or n ) ?]
h a k b c y
Constant 0.291756 0 11.083604 0 0.803592 1.080683
a(-1) 0.341715 0.950000 1.419062 0.025000 0.424583 1.836717
k(-1) -0.012547 0 0.941817 0 0.038542 0.005358
b(-1) 0.341715 0.025000 1.419062 0.950000 -0.318740 0.837086
e 0.350477 1.000000 1.455448 0 0.456074 1.911522
u 0.350477 0 1.455448 1.000000 -0.347518 0.830840
–>

If you could help me, I would thank you so much.

Best Wishes,

Claudio

MichelJuillard · September 24, 2006, 1:23pm

Dear Claudio,

the final answer doesn’t look wrong to me. You should rename the beta parameter in order to avoid the repeated warning.

Best

Michel