targafarian

7 ms·

31.
by targafarian 8y ago
I don't think scientists would hold up scientific progress to take a hard-line stance like you are presenting; but that's even irrelevant as PyTorch supports CPUs already (AMD, Intel, ..?) and AMD/PyTorch are close to support
32.
by targafarian 8y ago
Yeah, properly written Python is at extreme worst O(1000) times slower than speeding it up code with a Numpy/Numba/c/Fortran/etc. implementation. Brute-force loopy code in Python I've seen is 100x slower than the co
33.
by targafarian 8y ago
Much credit to you for changing that in the example. Will give it a try to see what the advantages/disadvantages are next time I need do do more complex tasks in parallel (I generally like Dask, but I would certainly need to try this o
34.
by targafarian 8y ago
from charmpy import * Please, for the love of God, import names explicitly or use e.g. `import charmpy as cp` and subsequently `cp.foo` so that reading example code we get a better sense of your API without having to guess which names were
35.
by targafarian 8y ago
It doesn't appear that the high school students are authors on the paper. Academic papers place authors at the top of the paper (some exceptions for e.g. huge collaborations with hundreds of authors) and acknowledgments at the end of t
36.
by targafarian 8y ago
This is a good summary of a large portion of code written in academia. "Didn't know how to program," "wrote it for myself," and "just trying to get a result." I've heard that a billion times. Not such
37.
by targafarian 8y ago
Yes! I think what I've come to is: Spend more time thinking about how to do something more concisely, rather than spending time thinking of how to abstract the code. Sometimes the former leads to the latter. But less code--or rather mo
38.
by targafarian 8y ago
Funding on large science projects that I've seen, at least how the NSF does it, "filters up" where the proposal is passed through technically aware committee before being passed up to less technically aware people. And there
39.
by targafarian 8y ago
I have to say that Matlab folks might be happier transitioning over to Spyder; Jupyter is much more like Mathematica, though. Those are very different interfaces (and each has its strengths / use cases).
40.
by targafarian 8y ago
JupyterLab has the ability to open multiple "views" on the same file. http://jupyterlab.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user/notebook.htm...
41.
by targafarian 8y ago
If you compare RStudio to matlab, then is Spyder for python more what you're interested in, an IDE with interactive code execution, variable inspection, and debugging? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyder_%28softwa
42.
by targafarian 8y ago
"Unix-y" is a paradigm or design philosophy, not an operating system. You can write unixy things for any OS. That's what the parent is talking about, not an operating system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki&#x2F
43.
by targafarian 8y ago
I would be curious about the code you use. Numpy was natural for me after going through engineering school, where Matlab was taught from year 2 on. Again, that was a language much more focused on the numerics. But as soon as I had to do som
44.
by targafarian 8y ago
This comment just sounds like "I know tool X well, somebody else doesn't know tool Y well, and therefore tool X is better." To do matrix multiplication on many matrices "stacked" together in one step, use numpy.matm
45.
by targafarian 8y ago
Note that the alternative in Numba is incredibly convenient, where you can trivially create a function where the body of the function operates on a scalar, but then using the @vectorize decorator which makes it into a numpy ufunc automatica
46.
by targafarian 8y ago
Claims about Numba by the author seem a little unkind if not wrong to me. Numba can handle vectorized (numpy behavior) directly in addition to explicit loops. The former is accelerated less in comparison to plain python calling numpy (since
47.
by targafarian 9y ago
But in an industry like power generation / "the electric grid," the obviousness of this might be outweighed by momentum (and money?) for the status quo. Especially in regulated services like these (roughly speaking, and depen
48.
by targafarian 9y ago
I interpret this as you switching from an browser by a relatively small organization that has certainly made some mistakes but is backing down with a relatively small amount of user feedback to one by a much larger organization that has les