|
|
|
|
|
|
by na85
4673 days ago
|
|
|
>Um, people have been doing high performance numeric and scientific computing for over 15 years now. Have I disputed this fact somewhere? >The truth is, for a lot of numeric computing, you're better off using python, which calls fortran or c code to do the heavy lifting. Proof that Python can't get the job done in that particular area. Nevertheless there remain Python zealots who will tell you that it's the best for everything. >Fortran can run very fast. If all you need to do is numerical calculations, that might be enough. Actually it sounds like that is all he needs to do. Reading and spitting out a .csv file from Fortran is trivial, despite its clunky IO syntax. |
|
|
Yes, when you were complaining that "These are the guys trying to cram Python into every possible goddamned use case".
Proof that Python can't get the job done in that particular area.
Python can't run at all without C code. Fortunately, Python interfaces really well with C and C++ and fortran. The fact that Python lets you be way more productive using fortran tools without having to know or suffer from fotran's glaring deficiencies seems like a huge plus to me.
Reading and spitting out a .csv file from Fortran is trivial, despite its clunky IO syntax.
Not really. People who do serious analysis need to make graphs. They need to push data back into SQL databases. They need to do all sorts of interactive analyses. They need to present their results and analytics to other people, including reviewers. They need to debug their analysis. All of that stuff is much easier with python than fortran.