17 ms·
Yeah, I've actually heard about ND4J and was interested in learning about it. But as I said in my parent post, Java seems (from the outside) as this huge unwie
by mablap 10y ago
Yeah, I've actually heard about ND4J and was interested in learning about it. But as I said in my parent post, Java seems (from the outside) as this huge unwieldy language that is hard to get into.
What could I do with Java/ND4J in scientific computing that I couldn't do with other packages, or that is much easier/better done on the JVM?
- agibsonccc 10y agoYeah and it might be. We're targeting the big data folks with this framework frankly. Anything that does static typing might be overkill for just running matrix math. I created nd4j with the intent of having the same primitives and programming model accessible to me for production environments and also affording me the same privileges of optimizing things in c with nice clean abstractions. scala MIGHT be easier which is why we created nd4s: https://github.com/deeplearning4j/nd4s https://github.com/deeplearning4j/nd4s The JVM and the developers who use it are mainly people with salaries soliving a very specific class of problems not people publishing papers. The one exception to this I've seen is the NLP community. I'd argue it's just a different audience who needs the things the jvm has, eg: static typing, integrations with libraries, etc. For large codebases you really can't beat jvm tooling..if you just need a click repl and throwaway code? It might be a bit much if you don't already know it.