Re:Deep learning may need a new programming language
by mcabbott on Tuesday February 19, 2019 @09:43AM
(#19199201)
Maybe I phrased that poorly: you can indeed write the loops yourself (without a speed penalty) as advertised, to do things which are hard/ugly/impossible in numpy. But very often you can do this without dropping all the way down to explicit pointer arithmetic, where you'd have to care about base-0/1 and off-by-one errors (again without penalty). This in-between zone is what I was trying to suggest is worth exploring. See for example https://julialang.org/blog/2016/02/iteration for a taste.
Someone more polyglot than I am will have to comment on C++ comparisons.
Re:Deep learning may need a new programming language
by Sean1708 on Tuesday February 19, 2019 @09:24AM
(#19199080)
You can do some pretty interesting things with indexing in Julia: https://julialang.org/blog/2016/02/iteration
If I want to stick with higher-level construct for dealing with "collections of numbers", I can use numpy arrays in Python, the STL in C++, etc.
Do you think Julia's high-level constructs are much better than the competition? E.g., how do they compare with C++20 ranges?