Re:Why scientists are turning to Rust
by 7thaccount on Wednesday December 02, 2020 @11:32PM
(#25285403)
Yep, autocorrect I guess. My point being if someone is just doing a little string work than she'll scripting can be very performant and also dead simple.
I normally think of scientific programming as something involving lots of large matrices, but that isn't the case for everything.
Re:Why scientists are turning to Rust
by proverbialbunny on Friday December 04, 2020 @05:22PM
(#25309042)
>I normally think of scientific programming as something involving lots of large matrices, but that isn't the case for everything.
It typically is. If you have the right libraries, it's only a few lines of code to do a lot of math. C = A + B could be matrix math, not just single variables being added.
Re:Why scientists are turning to Rust
by 7thaccount on Wednesday December 09, 2020 @11:50AM
(#25360618)
In my experience yes, but I started thinking about stuff like the human genome project which was mostly done with Perl scripts and BioPerl in the year 2000 iirc. I assume that is mostly just regex work dealing with very large strings. Is it scientific computing? Yes, just not as how I typically view scientific computing.
Assuming that "ask" was a typo and you meant "awk", awk does support user-defined functions, as does bash.
https://www.gnu.org/software/gawk/manual/html_node/User_002d...
https://tldp.org/LDP/abs/html/functions.html
The support for that in both is somewhat limited as compared to "full" programming languages, though.