4 ms·
I think it's fair. We're not talking about that intrinsic language qualities, we're talking about what you can do. Or that's my take anyway. That's what I think
by swsieber 6y ago
I think it's fair. We're not talking about that intrinsic language qualities, we're talking about what you can do. Or that's my take anyway. That's what I think of comparing when the lead line for the whole conversation is "tool belt".
- adamnemecek 6y agoThe two are related. If i can't write fast code in the langauge itself but have to resort to another langauge, then that's very much a "what can you do with it" problem.
- swsieber 6y agoAnd I'm saying doing stuff with numpy counts as doing stuff in python. Just because numpy is mostly implemented in c doesn't prevent me from writing ML in python.
- adamnemecek 6y agoI understood. What if you need a feature that is not implemented in C and exposed? You need to write C.
- michaelcampbell 6y agoSame issue with Julia, no?
- swsieber 6y agoJulia is much more amenable to implemening it though in native Julia, so I think it's a lot easier to stay out of C even when there's a similar library hole between Julia and Python. However, it's just a wall I haven't really bumped into. I suspect many people don't, and a part of that is popularity - so much exposure can do a lot to expose the warts. Though I think that goes for both Julia and Python. But I think once you know numpy well you probably won't run into that restriction (can extend in the native python) unless you're an expert (for the ML usecase).
- swsieber 6y agoI agree with you there. I just haven't hit that need yet. I suspect most people don't.
- dunefox 6y agoI suspect many people do but just don't (yet) realise that there's an alternative.