3 ms·
I'll throw my experience onto the pile of anecdotes in support of Ng's opinion. I've done both his Coursera class and another ML class that used Python. I star
by bunderbunder 10y ago
I'll throw my experience onto the pile of anecdotes in support of Ng's opinion.
I've done both his Coursera class and another ML class that used Python. I started the one class with zero Matlab/Octave experience, and the other with some Python but no real Numpy experience.
Getting comfortable with Octave for doing basic vector/matrix operations took very little time, and within an hour I was able to just focus on learning the math. By contrast, I've been using Numpy on-and-off for a year now, and I still feel wedded to the reference manual.
Keeping track of all the @$@#% types is definitely a chore. There may be technical advantages to doing things that way, but that doesn't make it any more learner-friendly. Nor does the Python community's habit of not bothering to specify types in the documentation help things in that department.
- Steeeve 10y agoI'm with you. When you are doing things as your day-to-day learning the syntax and gotchas associated with whatever language are pretty easy, but when you come at it every once in a while working with Octave or Matlab are so much easier. I can see the benefit that tooling provides, but from a getting-started standpoint, reducing the complexity makes you significantly more productive. You can concentrate on learning the concepts and not the language nuances. For someone who already knows and works with numpy or r, Octave might not be necessary. Then again, it's not like its particularly hard to pick up Octave and be able to work with it.