Xavier,
I'm sorry to hear that you're going to poo-poo the ::PP :)
In any event, I'll look forward to seeing your article when finished.
PDL needs all of the exposure it can get at this point.
Thanks!
Judd
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 07:44 +0000, Xavier Calbet wrote:
> Hi Judd,
>
> I understand your point. But there is another reason:
> I do not think you would say PDL IS Perl, I normally say
> PDL is an extension of Perl in the sense that it almost
> is a new language you have to learn (knowing just Perl
> is not enough to code in PDL). The same can be said
> for PDL::PP, it is really en extension of PDL in the
> sense that it is a new language you have to
> learn (which by the way I seldom use because
> I find it difficult to use, I normally end up including
> a C or FORTRAN routines rather than coding in PDL::PP).
> I would also need to explain PDL::PP in the article and
> it would make it more complicated and longer :=)
>
> Many thanks for your comments,
>
> Xavier
>
> On 3/1/07, Judd Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Xavier,
> > Using inline PDL::PP gets around the problem with makefiles, etc...
> > but
> > adds a small compile time to the first run of the program.
> >
> > The thought is that this article will lead to readers thinking "I
> > need
> > to start a project in one of these languages, which one should I use?".
> > In that case, it would make sense for the benchmark to reflect what the
> > finished project would be if someone who knew PDL fairly well had
> > written it. And I think most people who know PDL fairly well would end
> > up using at least inline PDL::PP for this particular problem.
> >
> > I think the same goes for the other languages as well, they should
> > all
> > be using their own bag of tricks. When all said and done, the real
> > "money" comparison is the time it takes to get it coded at an optimal
> > speed (if possible in that language). Just my 2 cents, though...
> >
> >
> > -Judd
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 22:46 +0100, Xavier Calbet wrote:
> > > Hi Judd,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your response.
> > > I do not quite understand everything you say. I think that
> > > if you go for PDL::PP you end up compiling, makefiles, etc.
> > > This is NOT user friendly, so I think this solution
> > > does not compare well with other equivalent languages
> > > where you do NOT need to compile.
> > >
> > > Xavier
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 3/1/07, Judd Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I think it should not. I don't think anyone that uses PDL seriously
> > > > would consider using a perl-level for() loop through a big dataset like
> > > > that.
> > > >
> > > > We all use PDL::PP and we mostly use Inline as well. If the benchmark is
> > > > to represent what we actually experience, then we should go ahead and
> > > > get rid of that for() loop and put in some PDL::PP code.
> > > >
> > > > If it _is_ considered cheating, then we should advise using pdl
> > > > threading to precompute several of the * calcs before getting into the
> > > > for loop.
> > > >
> > > > -Judd
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 15:39 +0200, Kaj Wiik wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 2007-03-01 at 07:32 +0000, Xavier Calbet wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The results are the following:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > gcc 201 sec
> > > > > > g77 201 sec
> > > > > > PDL 651 sec
> > > > > > IDL 694 sec
> > > > > > MatLab 2738 sec
> > > > > > Octave 2031 sec
> > > > >
> > > > > Would Inline Pdlpp considered cheating ;-)?
> > > > > It would be interesting though..
> > > > >
> > > > > Kaj
> > > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ____________________________
> > > > Judd Taylor
> > > > Software Engineer
> > > >
> > > > Orbital Systems, Ltd.
> > > > 8304 Esters Blvd, Suite 870
> > > > Irving, TX 75063-2209
> > > >
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > (469) 442-1767 x127
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > --
> > ____________________________
> > Judd Taylor
> > Software Engineer
> >
> > Orbital Systems, Ltd.
> > 8304 Esters Blvd, Suite 870
> > Irving, TX 75063-2209
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > (469) 442-1767 x127
> >
> >
>
--
____________________________
Judd Taylor
Software Engineer
Orbital Systems, Ltd.
8304 Esters Blvd, Suite 870
Irving, TX 75063-2209
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(469) 442-1767 x127
_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
