Just to finalize the previous discussion. I have made the decision that I will focus on using python for numerical computations. My decision is based on the fact that A: it is using python rather than it is own obscure language B: nicer graphics although 3D requires other python libraries C: it has functions for reading SEG-Y data and also deconvolution functions D: help function and function descriptions in Scilab are horrible and forums/mailing lists are not really effective.
However to be honest, I have to admit that I have uninstalled Sage and just installed the Numpy, Scipy and Matlibplot only. Sage is becoming massive. The download is about 300MB and I recall that after unfolding it occupies a space of 800MB. Compare this with the 15MB of Scilab!!! Although it might seem to make Sage very powerful, I think I would not use 99.5% of the possibilities Sage offers and actually wasting computer resources. Francis On Jul 7, 5:22 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >... > > At the moment I keep working with Scilab since I can work with it > > without learning to much new things, but I have spend some time using > > Sage and if Scilab 5 does not show the improvements I would like to > > see I probably lean very hard towards Sage. > > > By the way it has been mentioned several times on Sage websites that > > Scilab is not open source in the true meaning of the word. If you read > > the license agreement carefully you will find that commercialization > > of the code requires authorization i.e. you can't use the code to > > create your own Matlab/Mathematica to sell it to consumers and any > > derived/composite versions need to say copyright Scilab Enri (or > > something like that). Is that a big deal ... > > Yes. These discussions were usually in the context of why Sage doesn't > somehow work closely with the scilab project (e.g., building on top of it). > The license for Scilab is not GPL compatible so it is illegal for Sage to > build on the work of Scilab. My understanding is that this may change > in the next version of Scilab. > > > I guess I am rambling a bit, but in conclusion: Scilab and Sage are > > different packages with each pros and cons, both seem to have a good > > foundation (from community and government) and will be around for the > > coming years and maybe decades. Physicists/engineers probably will > > prefer Scilab whereas Scilab is not really an option for > > mathematicians. As physicist I have to acknowledge that Sage has some > > good trump card and if Scilab does not improve I will really consider > > using Sage for professional use rather than just interest. > > There are a lot of people in the "numerical Python" / numpy / scipy community > who work is all in Sage. This conferencehttp://conference.scipy.org/has very > good participation. Sage definitely aims to one day be a viable alternative > to Matlab. We care about the physicist and engineer users. > > If you do switch to Sage, please consider (re)writing some of our > documentation > to be more engineering friendly. > > -- William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-edu" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-edu?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
