On Dec 30, 2013, at 6:31 PM, Karl Glazebrook <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd be interested to hear you expand on your comments Doug as to why PDL is > technically superior. I guess you are referring to the threading? I don't > know much about scipy though I gather it has something like that? Maybe we > should have a document on PDL's unique features.
I have only explored numpy/scipy a little, but I hold PDL to have an objective advantage in both threading and in ease of tying in outside codes. Threading is orthogonal, elegant, and very, very powerful - although my experience is limited, I don't think scipy has equivalent tools - their vectorization is more like IDL's, if I understand right. PP, Inline::Pdlpp, Inline::C, and Inline::F77 make it a snap to drop down to compiled code or link in external libraries. (That's even before David's in-progress stuff on tcc reaches fruition.) Again, I could be missing something but it appears Python still requires producing a several-file library to link in the simplest of C programs. There are a number of smaller things that could just be subjective and that boil down to the religious war over the host language -- Perl makes it very easy to do a lot of things (like object manipulation) that I find difficult or extremely awkward in Python. But enough people disagree on those issues in enough familiar ways that I can't really count them to Perl's or PDL's advantage over Python or Numpy. _______________________________________________ Perldl mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
