Julia devs are working hard trying to make a language than is consistent
and elegant, they don't want to add functions in Base only because they are
convenient for people coming from a particular background when there's a
more "Julian" way of doing it. Plus if you start adding matlab's
> I think this is a big mistake so many Julia developers (not all) are
> making:
>
>
I agree with this. For all those in future that are not necessarily
programmers (and Julia hopes to attract many of those, I believe) and will
need a meshgrid, the time will take them to find out the
" and as long as it’s not in Base there’s a good chance that beginner
Julians will pick up more performant idioms."
Hi Tomas,
I think this is a big mistake so many Julia developers (not all) are
making: Julia should not just be great for performance of code but also for
performance of the
I also don't see the major issue with the inefficiency of meshgrid.
We do provide functions for evaluating
c = a * b
with a, b being vectors and we know that it is not efficient to do so (due
to the temporary vector introduced)
Tobi
Am Mittwoch, 9. März 2016 10:54:18 UTC+1 schrieb Christoph
Nice list of alternatives.
But it doesn't change the fact that meshgrid is very easy to use, and very
easy to read. New idioms should not be forced on developers. I know in what
ways mesh grid is inefficient and when that matters then I won't use it.
But more often than not I just want a
Thank you very much, it was really helpful!
On Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at 1:00:53 AM UTC-6, Tomas Lycken wrote:
>
> The thing with meshgrid, is that it’s terribly inefficient compared to
> the equivalent idioms in Julia. Instead of implementing it and keeping with
> inefficient habits, embrace
Neat.
Wherever it goes it needs a pointer
from
http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/manual/noteworthy-differences/#noteworthy-differences-from-matlab
but its a bit long to actually go there.
On Tuesday, 8 March 2016 17:00:53 UTC+10, Tomas Lycken wrote:
>
> The thing with meshgrid, is that
That's awesome Tomas. Thanks for the lesson :D
The thing with meshgrid, is that it’s terribly inefficient compared to the
equivalent idioms in Julia. Instead of implementing it and keeping with
inefficient habits, embrace the fact that there are better ways to do
things :)
Since this question is recurring, I think the problem might
Try
Ainterp = [itp[x,y] for x in X, y in Y]
It's best to do this inside a function, because then the element type should
be inferred, and it will be far more efficient.
Best,
--Tim
On Sunday, March 06, 2016 05:22:17 PM mauricio...@gmail.com wrote:
> Thank you for your note,
>
> But the
I used the meshgrid in Julia's examples folder:
https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/master/examples/ndgrid.jl
On Sunday, March 6, 2016 at 8:33:58 PM UTC-5, Isaiah wrote:
>
> I think most pure-Julia interpolation work has converged to the
> Interpolations package:
I think most pure-Julia interpolation work has converged to the
Interpolations package: https://github.com/tlycken/Interpolations.jl
(several alternatives are also listed on that page)
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 8:22 PM, wrote:
> Thank you for your note,
>
> But the problem
Thank you for your note,
But the problem is that broadcasting will not work in my case, once I
already have the three vectors that I want to plot instead of
two entries and one image (as in the example). I believe that I need
something to interpolate my vectors in order to generate the
See:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/julia-users/meshgrid|sort:date/julia-users/FuKK7zjncN8/dpWjRImMBgAJ
On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 7:30 PM, wrote:
> Is the meshgrid function (similar to MATLAB) available in Julia?
>
> I'm trying to plot a surface using 3 (1D)
Is the meshgrid function (similar to MATLAB) available in Julia?
I'm trying to plot a surface using 3 (1D) vectors and I'm not sure yet how
can I deal with this problem
without using this function.
Thank you!
15 matches
Mail list logo