| Re: One Reason Python is not taking over for IDL [message #78759] |
Wed, 21 December 2011 09:16  |
David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Russell writes:
> I'm willing to believe that Python is a better language, but never
> because it's cheaper. I'm willing to pay for a product that works.
Humm. What do we say, then, about IDL 8.x? :-(
Cheers,
David
--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.idlcoyote.com/
Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")
|
|
|
|
| Re: One Reason Python is not taking over for IDL [message #78760 is a reply to message #78759] |
Wed, 21 December 2011 09:08  |
Russell[1]
Messages: 101
Registered: August 2011
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I have rejected Python time and time again, because I find I spend so
much time tracking down compatibility issues. Which is *ALL* after
the nightmare installing the bloody software.
Personally, I think this goes back to the recent surge for Mac OSX.
Scientists are migrating to Mac (and holding onto their IDL), because
you get what you pay for. Sure those things cost more money than
their alternatives (Python v IDL, Linux v Mac), but what you pay for
in dollars --- you make up with ease of use, reliability, and global
infrastructure. I have little doubt that one day, Python will be as
attractive to me as IDL --- and I might begrudgingly join the Dark
Side (such as I'm hired to work in Python-land).
I'm willing to believe that Python is a better language, but never
because it's cheaper. I'm willing to pay for a product that works.
Russell
On Dec 21, 11:33 am, David Fanning <n...@dfanning.com> wrote:
> Folks,
>
> Here is one (probably the main) reason Python is not taking
> over for IDL:
>
> http://software-carpentry.org/2011/12/it-just-keeps-on-hurti ng/
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
> --
> David Fanning, Ph.D.
> Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
> Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming:http://www.idlcoyote.com/
> Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")
|
|
|
|
| Re: One Reason Python is not taking over for IDL [message #78848 is a reply to message #78759] |
Wed, 21 December 2011 12:31 |
Russell[1]
Messages: 101
Registered: August 2011
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I've recently graduated to IDL >8 (specifically 8.1), and for the most
part everything is in good shape. I don't, on the other hand, use
many of the new features and largely still do things "the old
fashioned way" (e.g. using things like the procedural plotting
routines) because I work closely with people who are still using IDL
7.x and we share code. I'm anxious to learn about the new features
(and bugs), when my collaborators catch up!
I did have to change a few minor things --- but all of them are
backwards-compatible. But it was readily apparent what the problem(s)
are/were.
R
On Dec 21, 12:16 pm, David Fanning <n...@dfanning.com> wrote:
> Russell writes:
>> I'm willing to believe that Python is a better language, but never
>> because it's cheaper. I'm willing to pay for a product that works.
>
> Humm. What do we say, then, about IDL 8.x? :-(
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
> --
> David Fanning, Ph.D.
> Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
> Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming:http://www.idlcoyote.com/
> Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
