Why I Still Use Python for High Performance Scientific Computing

Re:Why I Still Use Python for High Performance Scientific Co... by wesm on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @02:47AM (#10661564)

Claiming that using wrapped libraries written in another programming language (LAPACK, anyone?) is an inauthentic usage of the language (here, Python) is pedantic and unhelpful. C is just a wrapper for assembly, then, right?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why I Still Use Python for High Performance Scientific Co... by lmm on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:23AM (#10661873)

Sometimes it's not - sometimes LAPACK is written in C. Sometimes your C is just a wrapper around FORTRAN and people should take this fact seriously: modern FORTRAN is often a better option than C for numerical workloads.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why I Still Use Python for High Performance Scientific Co... by wesm on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:29AM (#10661893)

I never stated what language LAPACK was written in.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why I Still Use Python for High Performance Scientific Co... by lmm on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @04:32AM (#10661905)

Then what was "C is just a wrapper for assembly, then, right?" supposed to mean?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why I Still Use Python for High Performance Scientific Co... by wesm on Wednesday December 02, 2015 @07:32PM (#10666947)

Drawing a parallel!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why I Still Use Python for High Performance Scientific Co... by lmm on Monday December 07, 2015 @07:43AM (#10689065)

What's the parallel? Python wrapping a C library is very different from C compiling down to assembly (which is often not even how C is compiled).

[ Parent | on HN ]