Re^3: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing

[spx2]

in reply to Re^2: Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing
in thread Putting Perl Back on Top in the Fields of Scientific and Financial Computing

well, I would benchmark it against LAPACK, but I don't have the time, but if you want, you can do the benchmark and show me that I'm wrong :)

As a matter of fact, I would like to see some benchmarks myself, who knows, maybe I'm completely wrong(I saw most of the PDL code is C code and the Perl is just calling that).

the main problem is if people would use Perl+PDL for scientific/financial computing, but if they decide they won't use it, it doesn't matter if it's fast or slow. I think it is slower than LAPACK which doesn't necessarily make it very slow, just slower than LAPACK ..

[punkish]

well, I would benchmark it against LAPACK, but I don't have the time, but if you want, you can do the benchmark and show me that I'm wrong :)

So, you haven't really benchmarked it against LAPACK. Yet, you imply that PDL is slower than not just one (LAPACK) but many other similar tools. You want to be shown you are wrong. Why don't you make the effort and show that what you are asserting is indeed true.

Fwiw, I do use Perl/PDL, and I don't use LAPACK, so it doesn't matter how fast LAPACK is.

[spx2]

I don't make the effort because I don't have time, I'll stick to assertions in the meantime :)

But you can make some benchmarks, not very complicated.

[mr_mischief]

So your time is more valuable than that of someone else? Who are you, Hillary Clinton? Hu Jintao? Gordon Brown? Stephen Hawking? Mahmud Gebril? What are you doing for the world that punkish isn't? How would you know? Such arrogance you show. For shame...

[Anonymous Monk]

Then you need to prefix all your statements with I assert/assume, so everybody knows, and can ignore