> there are alternatives like LANPACK and BLAS.

LANPACK + BLAS = scipy

> Numpy/Scipy are only relevant to a minor set of computer users..

> ... Java and .NET ...

Being able to describe things with a syntax that looks almost like pseudocode and runs highly-optimized C/Fortran code to do heavy lifting has huge, huge advantages.

> LANPACK + BLAS = scipy

Thanks, I already knew that.

> Being able to describe things with a syntax that looks almost like pseudocode and runs highly-optimized C/Fortran code to do heavy lifting has huge, huge advantages.

Hence we are back at Scala, Clojure, F#, enjoying the respective AOT/JIT native code compilers, and integrating with that highly-optimized C/Fortran code.

I use Scala and Clojure. I like F#. Have you ever worked at an actual business that needs to hire developers that know these languages WELL? I can tell you that the significant added cost can't be justified by the not-very-big benefits compared to just using Scipy.

> Scala, Clojure, F#

Functional languages. The "year of Linux on the desktop" of programming languages. Also none of those look like pseudocode (Scala does if you ignore bits and squint).

The amount of job postings say otherwise.

No they don't. On stack overflow jobs F# has 14 posts, closure 28 and Scala ~100. Python has 400+.

Other sites have similar totals. But they are filtering for London/UK/Europe, so that might be a bias.