That Mathworks has done to Matlab since its creation has beenĪttempts to partition the namespace, and they all suck in their Log file, non-tabular data, data of mixed types are all awkward toĥ) The namespace situation is horrible. They should be easy and natural to use.Ĥ) Manipulating data in non-array format is difficult. Too, which has turned out to be an intractable mess of its own.ģ) String manipulation is totally clowny, basically because "solved" this by introducing the horribly complex handle and valueĬlasses in classdef style.
Original Fortran roots, a dubious solution in my mind.Ģ) Impossibility to have true reference semantics. Matlab has "solved" this by gluing Java data types onto the Not having linked lists nor hashes is frustrating. Mentality made sense when this was Fortran and Netlib we were Likewise, using 'īoth for strings and transposition makes some kinds of code veryġ) Very limited data structures. Very difficult to read and causes so many bugs. Peeve me off the most about this language:Ġ) Using () both for function calls and indexing makes the code
Octave vs matlab full#
> developer, and I would like to know more if possible.īasically, I agree with every post in this blog:īut, for the purpose of full disclosure, here are the things that > 'good' as Scipy or R? This was to me coming from you as a Octave > So all this intro is to ask, why do you think Octave is not as On 21 November 2012 10:26, Salva Ardid wrote:
0 kommentar(er)
