[Scilab-users] Matlab vs Scilab perf

Amanda Osvaldo lambdasoftware at yahoo.es
Sat Mar 4 22:01:10 CET 2017


Do you propose a reform in SciLAB community ? :-O 
-- Amanda Osvaldo
On Sat, 2017-03-04 at 13:24 +0100, Pierre Vuillemin wrote:
>     Concerning my assertion that Python outshines Scilab & co in
>       many other areas,
> 
>     
>       being a general purpose language, I feel that Python has a
>         broader range of application. For instance, for creating a
>         web-app, Scilab would certainly not be my first choice, while
>         Python is commonly used for that purpose. 
> 
>       
>       Python enables to write object-oriented code and has some
>         features from functional programming that are quite nice.
> While
>         Matlab and Octave have some "solid" OO features (at least,
> its
>         enough for what I'm doing with it), Scilab is lacking with
>         respect to this point. For functional programming, all other
>         environment are far behind what Python has to offer. For
>         instance I find that expressions as 
> 
>       
>     
>     
>       
>         stripped_list = [line.strip() for line in line_list if line
> != ""]
> 
>       
>     
>     are really elegant and readable. More generally,
>       manipulating lists in python is made really easy.
> 
>       I really enjoy lists in Scilab. They feel more coherent to me
> than
>       cells in Matlab, but I wish they had more python-like features.
> 
>     
>     
>       I feel that interfacing with other languages is easier with
>         Python than with Scilab/Matlab/Octave.
>       Packages, modules and namespaces enable to create very clear
>         structures.
>     
>     Besides, I could not agree more with you concerning bad
>       syntaxes/redundancy. Having a coherent environment is
> important.
> 
>     A step towards this goal may be to update and complete the code
>         convention for Scilab in a similar fashion to Python PEP?
> 
>     
> 
>     Regards,
> 
>     
> 
>     Pierre
> 
>     
> 
>     Le 02/03/2017 à 23:23, Samuel Gougeon a
>       écrit :
> 
>     
> 
>     
> > Hello Ricardo,
> >       
> > 
> >       
> > 
> >       Le 02/03/2017 à 19:33, Ricardo Fabbri a écrit :
> >       
> > 
> >       
> > > Speaking from experience:
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         It is worth mentioning that in many ways performance is
> > > not
> > >         critical
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         for a "lab" language like Scilab or Matlab. It is just an
> > >         extremely
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         simple language to test concepts and algorithms at a very
> > > small
> > >         scale
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         of granularity. The real crucial factor for Scilab or
> > > Matlab is
> > >         the
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         GUI for exploring data and developing algorithms
> > > interactively.
> > >         Once
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         you have a working solution, you'll fit it inside a
> > > bigger and
> > >         more
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         relevant
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         system by porting promptly to a language like C++ for
> > >         scalability and speed.
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         Just use Scilab for what its worth, don't obsess with
> > > speed,
> > >         even
> > >         
> > > 
> > >         though it is important.
> > >         
> > > 
> > >       
> > 
> >       
> > 
> >       I agree: Matlab, Scilab, Octave, IDL, GDL.. Yorick etc were
> > and
> >       are still first made for prototyping, not for speed. This is
> > why
> >       they were back to interpreted -- and so slower -- languages.
> >       
> > 
> >       But they should not have any handicapping snail instructions
> > for
> >       common frequently used ones like scf(). Loosing time gained
> > with
> >       an easy language avoiding to declare each object type and to
> >       compile and link the whole thing each time that we change a
> >       semicolon in the code... would be meaningless.
> >       
> > 
> >       
> > 
> >       So yes, i definitely agree: it is a matter or ergonomic for
> > GUIs
> >       but also and first for the language (regular namings,
> > rational
> >       order of arguments, etc) that make it easy to learn and use.
> > This
> >       is somewhat why i never really got inside python (and sciPy).
> > I
> >       felt its syntax not straightforward to learn, even for simple
> >       things. Same thing for R. And it's always the same feeling
> > when i
> >       try to compare results from these various languages --
> > including
> >       javascript --, for instance to extend Scilab or debug it,
> > seeing
> >       usages or conventions the most used elsewhere. Each time, it
> > is
> >       quite harder for me to find and understand the relevant
> > syntax
> >       with Python and R, while for instance i find javascript more
> >       intuitive.
> >       
> > 
> >       This is why i don't know much about Python. When Pierre
> > writes
> >       "Python outshines Scilab/Octave/Matlab in many other areas.",
> > i
> >       would be interested to know more about that.
> >       
> > 
> >       
> > 
> >       I agree with you, Pierre, about the whole environment. This
> > is
> >       why, on this aspect, we could have a specific discussion
> > about
> >       which modules -- with which components -- should rather
> > compose
> >       "Scilab core", and which features could be distributed rather
> > on
> >       ATOMS. I am not convinced that the current "Scilab core"
> >       composition is optimal. IMO, it is quite unbalanced by
> > historical
> >       or particular influences.
> >       
> > 
> >       
> > 
> >       As a conclusion, i think that introducing non-optimal
> > syntaxes or
> >       duplicates etc in the language hurts much more than
> > introducing a
> >       quite slow algorithm. Simply because the algorithm can be
> > changed
> >       later without breaking anything, while introducing badly
> > designed
> >       syntaxes or usages is much harder to manage afterwards, and
> >       impedes much more learning, using and maintaining the
> > language.
> >       
> > 
> >       
> > 
> >       Best regards
> >       
> > 
> >       Samuel
> >       
> > 
> >       
> > 
> >       _______________________________________________
> >       
> > 
> >       users mailing list
> >       
> > 
> >       users at lists.scilab.org
> >       
> > 
> >       http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >       
> > 
> >     
> 
>     
> 
>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170304/8dd59916/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: face-surprise.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1603 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.scilab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20170304/8dd59916/attachment.png>


More information about the users mailing list