Hacker News Reader

Comment by enupten | Hacker News Reader

I agree with the lexical scoping part (explains more or less why I don't use Lush). Its a pity that there aren't any good numerical computing tools in Common Lisp/Scheme. Oh, well.

View on HN

With Quicklisp, the situation has improved a bit. I've used tpapp's libraries without much of a problem.

https://github.com/tpapp/

If Clojure is acceptable, there is Incanter (http://incanter.org/).

What about http://docs.racket-lang.org/math/ ?

I haven't looked into Racket-math, but this post: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2013-January/0560... makes me wonder if Racket is really up for non-toy numerics.

In contrast, SBCL uses tagless float arrays, so that array operations tend to be cache friendly. With adequate declarations, numerical code in SBCL tends to very fast (~1-3x C speed). I assume one can do the same with Bigloo and Chicken scheme as well.

On 04/22/2013 01:21 PM, Richard Cleis wrote: > Recently I used it for estimating orientation parameters of > telescopes. Inputs are the locations of stars, outputs are telescope > coordinates, parameters describe the relationship of axes to each other > and to the earth.

http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2013-April/057487...

> In contrast, SBCL uses tagless float arrays, so that array operations tend to be cache friendly.

This is also the case in Racket.

http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/flonums.html#%28part._...

I found a package that advertises being an R-like data frame just today, but haven't yet played with it: https://pkg.racket-lang.org/info/munger

Reply on news.ycombinator.com