| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #18976] |
Tue, 22 February 2000 00:00 |
davidf
Messages: 2866
Registered: September 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David McClain (dmcclain@azstarnet.com) writes:
> Perhaps "better than MatLab", but hardly what "professional programmers"
> want.
Well, I admit I didn't conduct a scientific study, but
I was thinking about what my friends and I like. We're
pretty professional, at least most of the time. Say before
the beer arrives. :-)
> What can you say of a language that is purely array oriented, but
> cannot comprehend the existence of an empty array?
I don't know. I don't know what an empty array is either.
Perhaps that's why I like IDL.
> What of a language that
> can itself reclaim memory from unused arrays, but forces the user to reclaim
> "pointers" and "objects"? Etc., etc., ...
I'm sorry, but I think this *completely* misses the point.
Cleaning up variables is one thing, but checking for *every*
pointer reference at the end of every program module that
exits would bring just about any program--never mind IDL--
to a complete stand-still. It shouldn't be done. I applaud
the folks at RSI for dismissing the idea out of hand.
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting
Phone: 970-221-0438 E-Mail: davidf@dfanning.com
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Toll-Free IDL Book Orders: 1-888-461-0155
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #18979 is a reply to message #18976] |
Tue, 22 February 2000 00:00  |
Sean Cote
Messages: 1
Registered: February 2000
|
Junior Member |
|
|
>> That, _and_ the IDL student software takes the opposite strategy.
>>
>> To wit, the student version of IDL is still at 5.0 (IIRC).
>
> Never mind, it's not very usable, anyhow, as you state yourself.
>
> But all that talk on Matlab made me curious, so I had a look, and at
> least for non US/Canada users, the Student edition of Matlab is even
> worse than the one of IDL, as it is limited to 128x128 matrices....
The Mathworks' Student VERSION has no matrix-size-limit unlike the
counterpart (Prentice Hall Student EDITION).
http://www.mathworks.com/products/studentversion/
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #18987 is a reply to message #18976] |
Tue, 22 February 2000 00:00 |
pit
Messages: 92
Registered: January 1996
|
Member |
|
|
In article <88te9t$er7$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Andrew <noymer@my-deja.com> writes:
> That, _and_ the IDL student software takes the opposite strategy.
>
> To wit, the student version of IDL is still at 5.0 (IIRC).
Never mind, it's not very usable, anyhow, as you state yourself.
But all that talk on Matlab made me curious, so I had a look, and at
least for non US/Canada users, the Student edition of Matlab is even
worse than the one of IDL, as it is limited to 128x128 matrices....
Peter
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. Peter "Pit" Suetterlin http://www.astro.uu.nl/~suetter
Sterrenkundig Instituut Utrecht
Tel.: +31 (0)30 253 5225 P.Suetterlin@astro.uu.nl
____________________________________________________________ ______________
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #18990 is a reply to message #18976] |
Tue, 22 February 2000 00:00 |
David McClain
Messages: 17
Registered: January 1999
|
Junior Member |
|
|
David Fanning <davidf@dfanning.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.131b0ab058866bad989a3c@news.frii.com...
> Michael C Schweisguth (mschweis@u.arizona.edu) writes:
>
> IDL does a better job of creating features
> professional programmers find desirable.
>
Perhaps "better than MatLab", but hardly what "professional programmers"
want. What can you say of a language that is purely array oriented, but
cannot comprehend the existence of an empty array? What of a language that
can itself reclaim memory from unused arrays, but forces the user to reclaim
"pointers" and "objects"? Etc., etc., ...
D.McClain, Sr. Scientist
Raytheon Systems Co.
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #18991 is a reply to message #18976] |
Tue, 22 February 2000 00:00 |
noymer
Messages: 65
Registered: June 1999
|
Member |
|
|
In article <MPG.131b0ab058866bad989a3c@news.frii.com>,
davidf@dfanning.com (David Fanning) wrote:
> [MATLAB] have had a strategy to seize the hearts and minds of
> young engineers in college with very cheap student
> software and they have executed it flawlessly. ...
That, _and_ the IDL student software takes the opposite strategy.
To wit, the student version of IDL is still at 5.0 (IIRC).
I don't know how this stacks up against MATLAB student version,
but the IDL student version is also badly crippled. The max array
size is 256x256. Try to make a 256x256 SURFACE with the IDL
student version, though. It barfs. SURFACE calls some internal
arrays, so the largest square array that can be SURFACE'd is 73x73.
And, the Student version of IDL (Linux) tells me that it expires in
March 2001. NOTHING in the pre-sale documentation told me about
this. (Of course, I am my own sysadmin...:-)
Just my $0.02. I like IDL. I have nothing against MATLAB -- never
used it. I don't use Object Graphics (are these in the student
version?), but they look cool. I am mostly interested in the graphics
not the number crunching so I'm happy with IDL --- the student version
could be shape'd up a little bit, though. At the very least it would
be nice to have a new student version before March 2001 :-).
-- Andrew
noymer@my-deja.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #19001 is a reply to message #18976] |
Mon, 21 February 2000 00:00 |
davidf
Messages: 2866
Registered: September 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Mark D. Williams (markw-xxxnospamxxx@resource-eng.com) writes:
> Thanks, David, it's rare that those PV-WAVE users
> out here get an actual invitation to join one of
> these newsgroup discussions!
My pleasure. :-)
> Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you
> actually saw a WAVE> command prompt? Anytime since
> your days at VNI?
Uh, well, yes. But to say more could jeopardize
potential revenue streams. :-)
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting
Phone: 970-221-0438 E-Mail: davidf@dfanning.com
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Toll-Free IDL Book Orders: 1-888-461-0155
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #19004 is a reply to message #19001] |
Mon, 21 February 2000 00:00 |
Mark D. Williams
Messages: 15
Registered: November 1999
|
Junior Member |
|
|
David Fanning wrote:
>
> Frankly, I don't know how the user of either one
> of these programs could go wrong. They are both
> great programs. And both a hell of a lot better
> than PV-Wave.
>
> (Not really, but I didn't want anyone out there
> to feel left out. :-)
Thanks, David, it's rare that those PV-WAVE users
out here get an actual invitation to join one of
these newsgroup discussions!
Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you
actually saw a WAVE> command prompt? Anytime since
your days at VNI?
Regards,
M. Williams
Resource Engineering, Inc.
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #19009 is a reply to message #19001] |
Mon, 21 February 2000 00:00 |
davidf
Messages: 2866
Registered: September 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Michael C Schweisguth (mschweis@u.arizona.edu) writes:
> again, what advantadge does IDL have over MATLAB? what would cause an IDL
> revival?
Oh, dear. I only jumped into this thread because
I have a quirky sense of humor that manifests
itself when my tennis game is tanking. :-(
But as long as I am here, let me make some more
serious comments about what might cause an IDL
revival.
First of all, let me say that Matlab is a great product.
And you are right, it's nearly ubiquitous. Those folks
have had a strategy to seize the hearts and minds of
young engineers in college with very cheap student
software and they have executed it flawlessly. I can't
imagine there is an engineering student anywhere who
doesn't know Matlab, and I'll bet a very large number
of them want it on their computers when they take their
first professional job.
My impression of Matlab and IDL is that Matlab is
probably still more sophisticated mathematically
and IDL is more sophisticated in terms of its programming
features. For example, you can build better graphical
user interfaces for your programs in IDL than you can
in Matlab. The differences used to be more profound than
they are now. Clearly the folks know about each other and
spend a fair amount of engineering resources trying to
copy each other's best features. Hence my crack about
them being the same thing. I think they are evolving towards
each other, rather than away from each other.
Matlab's mathematical superiority certainly evolved from
the interests and abilities of its founders, as did IDL's
superiority as an image processing language. ALthough both
programs have evolved, you can still clearly see in both of
them the vestiges of their early history. In fact, it is
probably the "approach" each takes to the subject at hand
that makes one feel "right" and the other "wrong" for each
individual user. (Not to mention that *none* of us wants
to learn yet another language after already suffering the
huge learning curve involved in learning either one of
these languages.)
Matlab certainly scores a point in having the ability
to make an executable file from its code. (Although I
understand that such a file cannot have graphical user
interface elements in it. Please correct me if I am
wrong.) IDL scores a point in adding such language
enhancements as pointers and objects. Objects in
particular have changed *everything* about the way
I write IDL programs. And the object graphics system
is unparalleled for representing 3D data.
Is IDL use spreading? Absolutely. I base this partly
on the sale of my IDL book. Just the other day I had
a look at the dollar amount of books sold in the past
two years. Shocking! And for a book the folks at RSI
thought was too simple-minded to appeal to anyone, too. :-)
But what was even more shocking to me is that sales
have not fallen off in over two years time! *That* is
a growing market, surely.
Could it spread more? Yes, certainly. I fear, sometimes,
that the reason Matlab is ubiquitous and IDL is only
becoming so is that the Matlab folks understand the
end user--and the *psychology* of the end user--much
better than the IDL folks. The high-end object graphics
system--even objects themselves--are fabulous. There
is nothing to touch them in Matlab to my knowledge.
But I'm afraid they are too complicated for the
normal user. Too fancy, too powerful, too hard to use.
Matlab, it seems to me, does a better job of focusing
on features the majority of their customers use
every day. IDL does a better job of creating features
professional programmers find desirable.
But, to their credit, the IDL folks are finally
beginning to see the value of the Matlab approach.
It is now possible to get some great academic pricing.
(Not $99, to be sure, but a whole lot closer to this
than it used to be. They do have a $99 student version
of IDL, but this is so crippled as to make it nearly
useless.) There is also a program at RSI to get people
to write more books about IDL. (Although no one has
contacted me. I'm still too simple-minded, I guess. :-)
And I know the engineering people are concerned about
putting some of the power of IDL back in the hands
of the casual user. All of this bodes well for the
future of IDL.
Frankly, I don't know how the user of either one
of these programs could go wrong. They are both
great programs. And both a hell of a lot better
than PV-Wave.
(Not really, but I didn't want anyone out there
to feel left out. :-)
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting
Phone: 970-221-0438 E-Mail: davidf@dfanning.com
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Toll-Free IDL Book Orders: 1-888-461-0155
|
|
|
|
| Re: idl2matlab translate-o-matic [message #19014 is a reply to message #19001] |
Mon, 21 February 2000 00:00 |
Nigel Wade
Messages: 286
Registered: March 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Michael C Schweisguth wrote:
>
>
> again, what advantadge does IDL have over MATLAB?
Don't temp me!
Are trying to start a holy war? ;)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Nigel Wade, System Administrator, Space Plasma Physics Group,
University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK
E-mail : nmw@ion.le.ac.uk
Phone : +44 (0)116 2523568, Fax : +44 (0)116 2523555
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
