| Re: Migrate away from idl? [message #68669] |
Thu, 19 November 2009 06:26  |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Maarten writes:
>> Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming
>
> The latter is very valuable. Without it I would have gone python quite
> some time ago.
Oh, oh. As someone interested in progress, I'll be shutting
the site down on Friday, so we can all get on with it... :-(
This whole discussion is depressing to me. Not because I
am such a huge fan of IDL, but because it all seems so
predictable to me. I understand this feeling of wanting to
look around for something else. Personally, I feel like I
haven't gotten anything of value for my IDL maintenance
dollars in the past five years or so. By "value" I mean
something I actually use in my IDL work. (24-bit PostScript
support is the exception.)
More iTool geegaws is unlikely to stem this tide of
interest in finding tools that are intuitive and simple
to use. Frankly, resizeable graphics windows and decent
fonts in direct graphics would have kept a lot of people from
looking around for something else. The best you can say
about IDL these days is that it isn't bad. I can see why
that's not generating a fanatical following.
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/
Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")
|
|
|
|
| Re: Migrate away from idl? [message #68673 is a reply to message #68669] |
Thu, 19 November 2009 04:25  |
Maarten[1]
Messages: 176
Registered: November 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Nov 19, 12:29 am, Brian Larsen <balar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a quick poll for the experts out there. I recently learned
> about (and was wowed) scipy and all the other python stuff that
> basically make it a viable substitute for idl. I am wondering if
> anyone has made the switch (if so why are you still on this usenet?)
> or came away from python or has any advice at all?
For a new project we have/will switch(ed) to Python + scipy + numpy +
matplotlib + pytables + pyhdf + ...
> Here is a gallery of plots and code from python
> matplotlibhttp://matplotlib.sourceforge.net/gallery.html
In some cases the plots from matplotlib require less fudging to become
publication quality. Changing the graphs interactively, and then
produce pdf/eps at a later moment really help. Perhaps the same can be
done with the itools, but I can't be bothered, matplotlib is just
easier. The IDL plots require quite a bit of work to get to
publication standards (mine anyway - no Hershey fonts for me).
> I am seeing some cool advantages and some disadvantages too, ill list
> a few to try and start a bit of discussion,
>
> Sames:
> array based a = a+1 for arrays
> multiplatform
> command line to test things out
> all the same plots are there (or at least all I do)
There are some plots that I would have to think hard to produce, where
matplotlib produces them with ease (a box plot comes to mind:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_plot ).
iPython is easily better than the IDL commandline
> +idl:
> I already know it
> code library that I am familiar with
> Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming
The latter is very valuable. Without it I would have gone python quite
some time ago.
> +python:
> no licensing fee
> easier scriptable (like into web pages etc)
> interactive plots that make iplot look like 1980
> super easy export of plots to png, pdf, ps whatever even interactively
> from the plot
> seems like its up and coming
Python is big, way bigger than IDL. Using SWIG it is generally easy to
include C-code in python, easier in my limited experience than it is
to do the same with IDL. Since for loops aren't quite as devastating
for performance as they are in IDL, you generally end up with code
that is easier to maintain (human-readable code).
Python is also a general programming language, with neat objects and
fully dynamic arrays and fully automated memory management (no object
or pointers to forget). Oh, the scripts and the run-time environment
use the same rules, no more for i=0,10 do & begin & j=j+i^2 & endfor
on the command line, and something subtly different in the script, and
python is smart about end of lines, so no
file_list = file_search(dir, $
pattern)
Docstrings are probably the best idea: have your documentation ready
for interactive use.
One disadvantage of Python: to install all the science code you need,
you'll be busy for a while, and some are just hard to get running
(scipy is one example, there are others).
Maarten
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Migrate away from idl? [message #68763 is a reply to message #68669] |
Thu, 19 November 2009 11:04 |
R.G.Stockwell
Messages: 163
Registered: October 2004
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"David Fanning" <news@dfanning.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.256f0392482b948698a7ce@news.giganews.com...
> Maarten writes:
>
>>> Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming
>>
>> The latter is very valuable. Without it I would have gone python quite
>> some time ago.
>
> Oh, oh. As someone interested in progress, I'll be shutting
> the site down on Friday, so we can all get on with it... :-(
>
> This whole discussion is depressing to me. Not because I
> am such a huge fan of IDL, but because it all seems so
> predictable to me. I understand this feeling of wanting to
> look around for something else. Personally, I feel like I
> haven't gotten anything of value for my IDL maintenance
> dollars in the past five years or so. By "value" I mean
> something I actually use in my IDL work. (24-bit PostScript
> support is the exception.)
>
> More iTool geegaws is unlikely to stem this tide of
> interest in finding tools that are intuitive and simple
> to use. Frankly, resizeable graphics windows and decent
> fonts in direct graphics would have kept a lot of people from
> looking around for something else. The best you can say
> about IDL these days is that it isn't bad. I can see why
> that's not generating a fanatical following.
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
Agree 100%. The their vision is not the same as mine, in
where IDL should go. The workbench is sort of a nice try at
being an IDE, but all I really notice about it is that the hot keys
have changed, and now ctrl W does not go to the command line,
instead it closes my editing window, and then i have to search my
1Tb harddrive for the file I was working on. (it doesn't even go to
the 'recent file' list).
So, that is what I have paid thousands of dollars for. Sneak attacks
on my file. lol.
cheers,
bob
|
|
|
|
| Re: Migrate away from idl? [message #68767 is a reply to message #68669] |
Thu, 19 November 2009 07:43 |
Nikola
Messages: 53
Registered: November 2009
|
Member |
|
|
> The best you can say about IDL these days is that it isn't bad.
> I can see why that's not generating a fanatical following.
>
I'd say it's a bit more than that. Of course new things will come from
time to
time but the ultimate value of IDL is the IDL community and amount of
work that
has been made to built numerous useful libraries available today. In
my field -
solar physics - there is a suite of routines called solarsoft that
integrates
hundreds of necessary functions for a range of solar instruments and
telescopes.
I wouldn't ever trade that for nicer fonts, interactive plots or any
similar
cosmetics. :)
Actually, beside IDL I use only two more things in my work - Fortran/C
for
numerics and TecPlot/ParaView for 3D visualization (though there is
also IDL
based Vapor for that).
Cheers,
Nikola
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
