comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Messages from Usenet group comp.lang.idl-pvwave, compiled by Paulo Penteado

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: IDL or PV-WAVE?
Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend 
Return to the default flat view Create a new topic Submit Reply
Re: IDL or PV-WAVE? [message #101 is a reply to message #100] Thu, 13 June 1991 11:06 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
jvb7u is currently offline  jvb7u
Messages: 1
Registered: June 1991
Junior Member
In article <BGLENDEN.91Jun11161231@colobus.cv.nrao.edu> bglenden@colobus.cv.nrao.edu (Brian Glendenning) writes:
#
#Which should we buy? Presumably PV-WAVE has more features, but are
#they worth more money? Since they can now diverge, which would you bet
#on long term?

Personally, I can't recommmend EITHER. They are both inferior to a good
object-oriented programming approach!

If you have to have the interactive capability (the ONLY advantage
these languages have), get Physics Analysis Workstation (PAW), which
is more powerful than either of the above and FREE from CERN.

In a nutshell, PAW was designed to be used for reducing experimental
data. Any type of data, but there is a package designed for High
Energy Physics. It has vastly superior memory management, graphics and
least squares capability to any interactive language I've ever
encountered. I guess it has to be, when a single "shot" of an
accelerator produces hundreds of megabytes of data! For more
information, send a request to cernlib@cernvm.cern.ch.

Jon
--
Jon Brinkmann Astronomy Department
Internet: jvb7u@Virginia.EDU University of Virginia
UUCP: ...!uunet!virginia!jvb7u P.O. Box 3818
SPAN/HEPnet: 6654::jvb7u Charlottesville, VA 22903-0818
[Message index]
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: GIVE ME A CLUE !!!
Next Topic: PV_WAVE HELP helps

-=] Back to Top [=-
[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri Oct 10 08:40:49 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.20045 seconds