[Scilab-users] What is the future of Scilab?

[amonmayr at laas.fr]

Le 02/17/2016 01:23 AM, AlvaroOsvaldo a écrit :
> I am worried, in previous versions of scilab, I implemented a medium 
> project for scientific computing with scilab at that time had many 
> memory leaks and had been a nightmare. With the new updates that was 
> fixed and this much better.  But now I am implementing another project 
> involving massive image processing. And the three atoms for this, one 
> does not work, one does not load images but the manual says they can 
> do, and other charges but leak the computer's memory and it took me 
> longer skirting the problem than implementing the solution. And worse, 
> because this the system is much slower than it should. This atom 
> memory failure it has been known, however, despite it make 
> impraticable to use the atom for medium and large projects, makes 
> three years that no one gets the bug. 
> forge.scilab.org/index.php/p/IPD/issues/992/ There are high 
> expectations with Scilab 6 and I believe we will have a much better 
> platform. But for what you know, in the meantime we will run out of 
> many atoms, and this greatly reduces the possibility of working in 
> scilab. What is the future of Scilab? For now, the impression I have 
> is that the atoms are abandoned and without the atoms the usefulness 
> of scilab is reduced a lot.

Hi,

I think there are two issues here:

1) The sad state of image processing toolbox with Scilab. It's 
terrrible. Image processing with Scilab is a nightmare. Every other 
language I use is far better than Scilab in this area (even extremely 
young language like Julia offers a better experience. The 3 toolboxes 
are either broken, unmaintained or difficult (or impossible) to install. 
And the experience is even worse under Linux (IPD for example requires a 
very old version of opencv to be manually installed under Linux which is 
a daunting task for most user and which introduces many compatibility 
issues with other softwares relying on opencv).

2) The lack of information on the life (or lack of life) for a given 
atoms module. I know some information is available on the atoms website, 
but I've always found it difficult to determine whether the package was 
long dead or under active development. There are some long dead modules 
that are still listed alongside with actively maintained ones and that 
show excellent rating. It's a bit confusing.

Concerning the first issue, image processing with scilab, I think a 
basic core image support should be part of scilab.

Antoine




> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> View this message in context: What is the future of Scilab? 
> <http://mailinglists.scilab.org/What-is-the-future-of-Scilab-tp4033471.html>
> Sent from the Scilab users - Mailing Lists Archives mailing list 
> archive 
> <http://mailinglists.scilab.org/Scilab-users-Mailing-Lists-Archives-f2602246.html> 
> at Nabble.com.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.scilab.org
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.scilab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20160217/6a41c7e9/attachment.htm>