Michael, I agree with you. From your side, you already know exactly what I am promoting : XQUERY could be a fabulous tool for scientific computing. Very flexible, easy template programming, handy and efficient storage provided by XML database vendors. It could be a graal for mathematicians. I wish I had weight enough in the XML industry to convince W3C to promote this point of view to XML Database vendors :)
2014-02-03 Michael Kay <[email protected]>: > > On 3 Feb 2014, at 13:09, jean-marc Mercier <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Well, I am sure that these algorithms can be parallelized, using 28.io, > or other vendor solutions. > However, honestly, today, you would have to spend tons of processors, > watts, intelligence, to perform a matrix multiplication over a 4000x4000 > matrix with JSONiq or XQUERY 3.0. > I can compute such a multiplication within a second using BLAS over a > single threaded process. > > > I don't think anyone(*) is suggesting that XQuery or JSONiq should be > anyone's number 1 choice for doing a matrix multiplication. The key thing > is to make the language powerful enough so that if you have an application > doing 300 tasks, the fact that one of them involves matrix mutliplication > shouldn't stop you. > > Just like XSLT isn't one's obvious choice of graphics programming > language, but it's sure handy that you can use it to generate an SVG > histogram or pie chart. > > (*) well, I exclude the XQuery fanatics from this.... > > >
_______________________________________________ [email protected] http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
