[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: equivalent for C-style init: structname varname[] = {...} ?

From: Salva Ardid
Subject: Re: equivalent for C-style init: structname varname[] = {...} ?
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:26:16 -0500
User-agent: KMail/4.9.3 (Linux/3.5.0-17-generic; KDE/4.9.3; x86_64; ; )

> This very rarely works. Matlab users do not want a better Matlab. If
> they do, they're usually savvy enough to use another language
> altogether and go to Scipy or R. There is very little room to make
> Octave less stupid than Matlab.
> - Jordi G. H.

Hi Jordi,

I've been using Matlab for quite long time now and I recognize pros and cons 
in Matlab language though (managing strings is a pain but language is easy and 
intuitive). I recently started to use Octave more systematically and I'm 
amazed by its power, nothing to really envy to Matlab actually (and better 
than Matlab in several aspects and discussed before in the lists).

On the other hand, I tried Scipy just a bit, but I know that to use it as I 
would I need to invest time and some effort (I never used R although some 
people is telling me to try it every now and then). And migrating the code I 
have do also require time.

So all this intro is to ask, why do you think Octave is not as 'good' as Scipy 
or R? This was to me coming from you as a Octave developer, and I would like 
to know more if possible...

I know every language has pros and cons, and this has also to be true for 
Scipy and R, not only Matlab and Octave.

Would you encourage people to stop using Octave and migrate to Scipy/R if 
Matlab compatibility is not a must and if time and effort to alleviate the 
learning curve of learning new languages or migrating codes is not an issue?

Your response will be very appreciated,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]