Re:Metaprogramming – Julia Language
by enupten on Wednesday August 14, 2013 @06:07PM
(#6214666)
I agree with the lexical scoping part (explains more or less why I don't use Lush). Its a pity that there aren't any good numerical computing tools in Common Lisp/Scheme. Oh, well.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
With Quicklisp, the situation has improved a bit. I've used tpapp's libraries without much of a problem.
If Clojure is acceptable, there is Incanter (http://incanter.org/).
What about http://docs.racket-lang.org/math/ ?
I found a package that advertises being an R-like data frame just today, but haven't yet played with it: https://pkg.racket-lang.org/info/munger
I haven't looked into Racket-math, but this post:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2013-January/0560...
makes me wonder if Racket is really up for non-toy numerics.
In contrast, SBCL uses tagless float arrays, so that array operations tend to be cache friendly. With adequate declarations, numerical code in SBCL tends to very fast (~1-3x C speed). I assume one can do the same with Bigloo and Chicken scheme as well.
On 04/22/2013 01:21 PM, Richard Cleis wrote:
> Recently I used it for estimating orientation parameters of
> telescopes. Inputs are the locations of stars, outputs are telescope
> coordinates, parameters describe the relationship of axes to each other
> and to the earth.
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2013-April/057487...
> In contrast, SBCL uses tagless float arrays, so that array operations tend to be cache friendly.
This is also the case in Racket.
http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/flonums.html#%28part._...