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

[Philipp Mühlmann]

Quote:

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

Well, agreed to this.


However here a different approach:

I wonder if it couldn't be helpful to connect Scilab with a native Image
processing Programm...like Inkscape.

Why trying to convert Scilab into a image processing tool, while there are
dedicated programs for it?

Yes I know: It might be better to have everything in one package, beeing
independent from other Software.
As I use IPD very much I'm glad to have this available.

I just have to think about a discussion about one complaining about Images,
trying to manage his images with MS-Word instead of using a proper Software.


Basic Image processing functions like rotate, shift, etc. might be done
using the "dos" command and Inkscape as well.


BR
Philipp













2016-02-17 12:21 GMT+01:00 Alasdair McAndrew <amca01 at gmail.com>:

> The poor quality of image processing toolboxes is what turned me off
> Scilab to GNU Octave, which has a very good imaging toolbox.  Or Python,
> which with its various imaging libraries and scientific/numeric libraries
> is now a serious competitor for matrix-oriented software like
> Matlab/Scilab/Octave.  I've written two image processing textbooks, and at
> no time has Scilab ever been a serious contender for their software.
>
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 7:20 PM, <amonmayr at laas.fr> wrote:
>
>> 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 listusers at lists.scilab.orghttp://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> users mailing list
>> users at lists.scilab.org
>> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> [image: http://www.facebook.com/alasdairmcandrew] [image:
> https://twitter.com/amca01] <https://twitter.com/amca01>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/alasdair-mcandrew-108178a>
> <https://plus.google.com/+AlasdairMcAndrew/posts>
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.scilab.org
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>


-- 
There we have the salad.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.scilab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20160217/869d9d03/attachment.htm>