William Stein wrote: > Hi, > > Since we're having this long thread comparing Sage to the Ma's, > somebody might find this interesting: > > http://www.larssono.com/musings/matmatpy/index.html > > it's supposed to be a comparison of writing the same > "numerical/scientific" code using Mathematica, Matlab, and Python. It > was recently posted on the numpy list. The interesting thing is that > the Mathematica code to do the same thing is literally about 10 times > longer than the Matlab and Python code. Either it's some kind of > weird joke, or the author doesn't know Mathematica very well, or > Mathematica has some significant drawbacks as compared to Matlab (and > Python) for expressing certain things. I have no idea. > > -- William
Without a description of the problem, I can't see how one can make an objective comparison. But of the first 5 lines of Mathematica code: (* Load libraries and prepare session *) << LinearAlgebra`MatrixManipulation`; << NumericalMath`TrigFit`; << Graphics`Graphics`; << Graphics`Arrow`; only the first one (a comment) is semi useful. All the functionality of the next 4 lines have all been built into the kernel, so no need to load those packages any more. In fact, they would all generate an error/warning. As Marshall say, the numerous plotting options are unnecessary too. I'm sure someone can write a few lines of Mathematica that would take hundreds of lines of MATLAB. It is an unfair and meaningless comparison. Dave > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 6:52 AM, William Stein<wst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 12:59 AM, Dr. David >> Kirkby<david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote: >>>> I definitely see your point. >>>> >>> Good. >>> >>> To be fair, I think confidentiality is more likely to be an issue with >>> Wireshark than Sage, but I can still see cases where confidentiality >>> could be an issue with Sage. >> Confidentially already is an important issue for some Sage users... >> >>>> Just for the record, I'm personally not going to be selling support >>>> contracts and making officially supported versions, etc., as you >>>> suggest above. That should be done by a private company that seeks to >>>> make money from Sage, and I am not going to start or run such a >>>> company. If somebody else wants to, then I would be supportive. I >>>> have my own ideas about how I personally will help Sage grow bigger >>>> and more supportive, and becoming a commercial entity is not among >>>> them. >>>> >>> Fair enough, that is your choice. The money does not need to go to you >>> personally, if you do not want it to, so there would be no need to set >>> up a commerical company for this. If the money was used to support the >>> Sage project, by hiring staff, buying better hardware etc then I would >>> think that a good thing. >>> >>> Either way, that is your choice. If you don't feel that is appropiate, >>> you might consider one other alternative, which is to offer free >>> confidential advice to commercial users when there is a specific need to >>> keep information away from public view. A statement on the Sage web site >>> something like this might be useful >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CONFIDENTAIL SUPPORT FOR COMMERCIAL USERS. >>> >>> Sage will improve most rapidy if all support requests are made in public >>> mailing lists. Quiries will be answered most rapidy on the putlic >>> forums. However, >>> in cases where specific information must be withheld from public view, >>> Professor Willliam Stein will offer free support to commerical users on >>> a confidential basis. >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Whilst I personally think a paid support contract, with the money >>> donated to the Sage project is preferable, agreeing to offer free advice >>> in confidence would go some way to increasing its accepantace in >>> commerical environments. >> In point of fact I already do devote nontrivial time to doing exactly >> what you suggest above (and sometimes in person, not just email). I >> just don't put a specific statement on the website. >> >> This is definitely worth discussing further. >> >> -- william >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
