joel wrote:
Rutger ter Borg wrote:
Ok. I am looking through the documentation of version 2, there are things I like, and some things to lesser extend, mainly because it tries to mimic Matlab. That's the design rationale of NT2. Main use case is : take a .M, get a .cpp, compile, ???, profit.
Doesn't http://www.mathworks.com/products/compiler/ fulfill this purpose? C++ and .m are quite different. My impression is that people at Boost tend to have lengthy discussions about syntax.
We started yes. But NT2 is a two men work, so it took times. But in the end, the goal is to have a flexible code base for "optimized computation on N-D table" and plug-in domain-specific interface on top of this. My main research topic is all about that, I just need time+people ;)
Of course :-) A DSL is not written overnight, either. Perhaps setting up a .qbk in the sandbox would be useful for this purpose? Regards, Rutger