From: ara.t.howard@... Date: 2006-08-09T00:50:30+09:00 Subject: Re: Profiling Ruby Matrix operations On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Jan Svitok wrote: > On 8/8/06, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote: >> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Jan Svitok wrote: >> >> > It has to be noted though, that python's support seems to be the most >> > complete, and fortunately for us, ruby is supported pretty good as well. >> It >> > saved me a lot of work... the swig generated .cpp file has 5 MB! >> >> the problem with that being that math and science should repeatable and >> verifiable - neither of which are likely to be true when a 5mb >> auto-generated >> file is in the mix... > > I'm not telling there's any math or science involved *in my case*. In > fact, it's a lot of small classes/structs, that's why the file gets so > large. What I'm saying is that using SWIG saved me a lot of work, and > helped me to make the extension quite quickly, without dipping into > ruby's source. And much of the code is repeating so the verification > wouldn't be so hard, I suppose. don't get me wrong - i love swig. i'm just pointing out that, to really verify, one (another programmer) would have to code two or more impls and test them against each other (assume we're lacking ground truth) and auto-generated code is a hindrence in the respect. just pointing that out - i've rushed into things like this before with complex image processing algorithms and, due to the internal complexity, not been able to verify correctness which, in the end, caused me to simply drop them on the floor even though they 'looked' good - it's an important consideration when coding math and/or science. kind regards. -a -- to foster inner awareness, introspection, and reasoning is more efficient than meditation and prayer. - h.h. the 14th dali lama