Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] New Astronomy Library
From: degski (degski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-02-13 14:09:33

On 13 February 2018 at 05:45, Pranam Lashkari via Boost <
boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> ... As we all know that python is one of the
> easiest languages to learn. Not all scientists are programmers and maybe
> that's why they find python and Astropy easy to use.

The above is being repeated over and over and over again. I find python
anything but easy to learn, it's rather confusing actually (and verbose).
If you would want an easy (a little over 20 keywords), versatile language
(with some rather advanced ideas), pick Lua.

> ... build a similar structure to the same library?

Isn't it a python lib using NumPy? You're gonna provide language bindings?

> It will make things easier for those scientists who do not have
> much time to learn a new programming language and this will make the
> transition easier from python to C++.

If you're a scientist, I doubt you'll decide to move from Python to C++ (or
C for that matter)... Tensorflow has a C++ API, it's so underused that the
documentation of that API is missing many bits.

If you cannot program, trying to do that in C++ is gonna be a very
frustrating experience (as in not making any progress whatsoever, which
means no research grants), iff you have to start from scratch.

> Is it a good idea?

Hard to say. Maybe you could explain (to the community) what you would like
to achieve in terms of "deliverable(s)", i.e. what will the end result be
(as in, what kind of thing).

The issue is maybe/possibly that Astronomy, as a field, seems to be rather
niche for a general library as Boost.


Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at