About scientific computing Language

In fact, I have always wanted to talk about the scientific computing language, but I have never spare time.

You may say that MATLAB is the best! -- Yes, but it costs money.

Python for science, free? It's very popular abroad now! -- But it is a general language, and it is even worse, it is a dynamic language (low efficiency ).

This is also true for Ruby.

F # -- it is not a Dynamic Language (although based on IL, but the computing library is C and Fortran), and it is also a functional programming language. It is more convenient to describe mathematical formulas.

I saw a lot of people scold F # On the Forum last time. I don't know what to say.

Yes, because F # is not prepared for IT personnel. It is more suitable for scientific and engineering technicians to describe complex algorithms.

You know, it is not easy to use a program to express a lot of formulas and equations.

Of course, F # is still very young. It was officially launched with the release of vs2010.

How many generations have C # Been developed? How many years has Python taken?

F # is still young. For example, there is no library of mathematical tools provided by many fans supporters. (after all, I cannot write a group of solving equations such as Gaussian sendell iterations ).

But do we always have to enjoy it? Then how can we "Catch the British and the American?

 

PS (2010-08-17 ):

There are indeed many cool people, thanks to the guidance of the High people.

Here we will add that F # actually supports functional programming, imperative programming, object-oriented hybrid static, and strong-type languages. It cannot be said that it is completely oriented to scientific and technical personnel.

Haskell is a general pure function programming language. In addition, Haskell's ability to describe mathematical logic is stronger than F # and more powerful.

 

F # Communication Group: 43056189