Gerry,
I have the similar background as yours, many years using SAS/R. Right
now I am trying to pick up python.
>From your point, is there anything that can be done with python easily
but not with SAS/R?
thanks for your insight.
wensui
On 1/1/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
We're not so far apart.
I've used SAS or 25 years, and R/S-PLUS for 10.
I think you've said it better than I did, though: R requires more attention
(which is often needed).
I certainly didn't mean that R crashed - just an indictment of how much I
thought I was holding in my head.
Gerry
--
http
Klaas wrote:
> C/C++ do not allocate extra arrays. What you posted _might_ bear a
> small resemblance to what numpy might produce (if using vectorized
> code, not explicit loop code). This is entirely unrelated to the
> reasons why fortran can be faster than c.
Array libraries in C++ that use o
sturlamolden wrote:
> as well as looping over the data only once. This is one of the main
> reasons why Fortran is better than C++ for scientific computing. I.e.
> instead of
>
> for (i=0; i array1[i] = (array1[i] + array2[i]) * (array3[i] + array4[i]);
>
> one actually gets something like thre
sturlamolden wrote:
> array3[:] = array1[:] + array2[:]
OT, but why are you slicing array1 and array2? All that does is create new array
objects pointing to the same data.
> Now for my question: operator overloading is (as shown) not the
> solution to efficient scientific computing. It creates se
Wensui Liu wrote:
> doing. However, that is not the fault of excel/spss itself but of
> people who is using it.
Yes and no. I think SPSS makes it too tempting. Like children playing
with fire, they may not even know it's dangerous. You can do an GLM in
SPSS by just filling out a form - but how m
Stef Mientki wrote:
> MatLab: 14 msec
> Python: 2 msec
I have the same experience. NumPy is usually faster than Matlab. But it
very much depends on how the code is structured.
I wonder if it is possible to improve the performance of NumPy by
having its fundamental types in the language, instea
Sturla,
I am working in the healthcare and seeing people loves to use excel /
spss as database or statistical tool without know what he/she is
doing. However, that is not the fault of excel/spss itself but of
people who is using it. Things, even include SAS/R, would look stupid,
when it has been m
Stef Mientki wrote:
> I always thought that SPSS or SAS where thé standards.
> Stef
As far as SPSS is a standard, it is in the field of "religious use of
statistical procedures I don't understand (as I'm a math retard), but
hey p<0.05 is always significant (and any other value is proof of the
op
On 12/31/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> R is the free version of the S language. S-PLUS is a commercial version.
> Both are targeted at statisticians per se. Their strengths are in
> exploratory data analysis (in my opinion).
>
> SAS has many statistical featues, and is phenom
> I think of SAS and R as being like airliners and helicopters --
I like that comparison,...
.. Airplanes are inherent stable,
.. Helicopters are inherent not-stable ;-)
cheers,
Stef
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
R is the free version of the S language. S-PLUS is a commercial version.
Both are targeted at statisticians per se. Their strengths are in
exploratory data analysis (in my opinion).
SAS has many statistical featues, and is phenomenally well-documented and
supported. One of its great strengths
Stef Mientki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Doran, Harold wrote:
> > R is the open-source implementation of the S language developed at Bell
> > laboratories. It is a statistical programming language that is becoming
> > the de facto standard among statisticians.
> Thanks for the information
> I al
Stef Mientki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mathias Panzenboeck wrote:
> > A other great thing: With rpy you have R bindings for python.
>
> forgive my ignorance, what's R, rpy ?
> Or is only relevant for Linux users ?
[...]
R is a language / environment for statistical programming. RPy is a
Pyt
Doran, Harold wrote:
> R is the open-source implementation of the S language developed at Bell
> laboratories. It is a statistical programming language that is becoming
> the de facto standard among statisticians.
Thanks for the information
I always thought that SPSS or SAS where thé standards.
Ste
age-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Stef Mientki
> Sent: Saturday, December 30, 2006 9:24 AM
> To: python-list@python.org
> Subject: Re: Wow, Python much faster than MatLab
>
> Mathias Panzenboeck wrote:
> > A other great thing: With r
Mathias Panzenboeck wrote:
> A other great thing: With rpy you have R bindings for python.
forgive my ignorance, what's R, rpy ?
Or is only relevant for Linux users ?
cheers
Stef
> So you have the power of R and the easy syntax and big standard lib of
> python! :)
--
http://mail.python.org/mai
A other great thing: With rpy you have R bindings for python.
So you have the power of R and the easy syntax and big standard lib of python!
:)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
> I'm not sure about SciPy,
Yes SciPy allows it too !
but lists in standard Python allow this:
>
array = [1, 2, 3, 4]
array[2:5]
> [3, 4]
>
> That's generally a good thing.
>
You're not perhaps by origin an analog engineer ;-)
cheers,
Stef Mientki
--
http://mail.python.org
>> MatLab: 14 msec
>> Python: 2 msec
>
> For times this small, I wonder if timing comparisons are valid. I do
> NOT think SciPy is in general an order of magnitude faster than Matlab
> for the task typically performed with Matlab.
The algorithm is meant for real-time analysis,
where these kind o
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:35:22 -0800, Beliavsky wrote:
>> Especially I like:
>> - more relaxed behavior of exceeded the upper limit of a (1-dimensional)
>> array
>
> Could you explain what this means? In general, I don't want a
> programming language to be "relaxed" about exceeding array bounds.
Stef Mientki wrote:
> hi All,
>
> instead of questions,
> my first success story:
>
> I converted my first MatLab algorithm into Python (using SciPy),
> and it not only works perfectly,
> but also runs much faster:
>
> MatLab: 14 msec
> Python: 2 msec
For times this small, I wonder if timing com
22 matches
Mail list logo
