[constantcrying]

What a terrible article. The author does not understand matlab at all and he is also either lying or totally clueless.

Matlab is successful because of precisely one thing, which nobody has replicated. It offers a complete software environment from one source.

Nowhere else can you get scientific computing, a GUI toolkit, a high level embedded software environment, a HiL/SiL toolkit, a model based simulation environment, a plotting and visualization toolkit and so much more in a single cohesive package. Nobody else has any offering that comes even close.

>The engine is closed source. You cannot see how fft or ode45 are implemented under the hood. For high-stakes engineering, not being able to audit your tools is a risk.

This is just a lie. Open matlab and you can inspect all the implementation details behind ode45. It is not a black box.

>The Cloud Gap: Modern engineering happens in CI/CD pipelines, Docker containers, and cloud clusters. Integrating a heavy, licensed desktop application into these lightweight, automated workflows is painful.

Another lie. See: https://de.mathworks.com/help/compiler/package-matlab-standa... Mathworks has done everything hard for you already. I do not understand why the author feels the need to authoritatively speak on a subject he absolutely does not understand.

[bloaf]

> Nowhere else can you get scientific computing, a GUI toolkit, a high level embedded software environment, a HiL/SiL toolkit, a model based simulation environment, a plotting and visualization toolkit and so much more in a single cohesive package. Nobody else has any offering that comes even close.

Mathematica does. Arguably Mathematica is even more cohesive because it's not split up into "feature sold separately" packages.

[nospice]

You're too generous here. This has all the hallmarks of an AI-generated article, and HN is once again duped into passionately arguing with something that took zero effort to produce.

[nallana]

>> The engine is closed source. You cannot see how fft or ode45 are implemented under the hood. For high-stakes engineering, not being able to audit your tools is a risk. This is just a lie. Open matlab and you can inspect all the implementation details behind ode45. It is not a black box.

How do I see the .c files / trace how `ode45` will execute on my machine? Can I see the JIT's source code?

--

Entitled to your view, but clearly difference of opinion here. From perspective of open / closed source -- maybe for you it qualifies as open source, but I can't follow the logic chain, so to me MATLAB is not open source.

[constantcrying]

I explicitly pointed out what the article was lying about.

"You cannot see how fft or ode45 are implemented under the hood." is a totally false statement. You absolutely can do exactly that. This is not a matter of opinion. Right click the function and open it, you can view it like any other matlab function.

> From perspective of open / closed source -- maybe for you it qualifies as open source

Matlab is obviously not open source. Who said anything about that? The article claims you can not audit ode45, that is false and it seems pretty embarrassing for someone speaking authoritatively about matlab to make such basic claims, which every matlab user can disprove with two clicks. Every single matlab user has the ability to view exactly how ode45 is implemented and has the ability to audit that function. This is not a matter of opinion, this is a matter about being honest about what matlab offers.

[nallana]

Seeing in MATLAB code how ode45 is implemented != how the thing is running on the machine. That's a very small top slice.

But okay -- as I mentioned, you're entitled to your views!

[hatmatrix]

fft.m is the more obvious example of the closed source algorithm here. You open it and it just says

% Built-in function.

The algorithms written in C and compiled by mex are the "built-in" ones that are not viewable.

[hatmatrix]

How about fft? If you open fft.m, you get just a commented file that ends with

% Built-in function.

If the algorithm is implemented as a compiled mex function, then you cannot inspect its details.

[dgfl]

They’re trying to sell their product, which seems like a new language + runtime inspired by matlab. Reinventing Julia perhaps? It will be missing all the things that make matlab unique, as you point out.

[nallana]

It's open source / free. But yes, of course we want people to try it and get value from it.