I suppose it's not too late to toss in my usual plea to stop playing this game - http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/NYCJUG/2007-04-10#Reframing_the_Efficiency_Discussion.
Also, we discussed Julia briefly at the last NYCJUG - I'd been to a Meetup at which the language was promoted by some of its creators. It looked to be a mashup of R and Matlab. I was tempted to ask how it was at array-handling but was pretty sure I already knew the answer: crappy, but we don't even know it because we just copied what's been done before. The thing that most impressed me about the presentation before I walked out on it was the timing comparisons of Julia to some other languages: it looked like JavaScript was better than just about all of them for many of their benchmarks. On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:45 PM, William Tanksley, Jr > <[email protected]> wrote: > > If you want the benefit of BLAS performance, you're stuck with BLAS' > > optimizations. > > BLAS is free software: it is legal to modify it and to distribute it > in changed form. > > Though I agree that [hypothetically speaking] it may be the case that > some changes would slow it down. > > -- > Raul > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > -- Devon McCormick, CFA ^me^ at acm. org is my preferred e-mail ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
