[HN Gopher] GNU Data Language
___________________________________________________________________
GNU Data Language
Author : tosh
Score : 58 points
Date : 2022-05-15 16:34 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| awelkjlek wrote:
| asperous wrote:
| Here is a language sample from Rosetta code:
|
| https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Mandelbrot_set#IDL
| Bostonian wrote:
| What are the advantages of GNU Data Language over established
| alternatives such as R, Python/NumPy, or Octave?
| gammarator wrote:
| Main advantage would be running existing IDL programs without
| the proprietary license. For any new development the
| alternatives you mention have a larger userbase.
| np_tedious wrote:
| Octave is also open source. It's GNU Octave, in fact
| adrian_b wrote:
| GNU Octave is intended as a non-proprietary replacement for
| MATLAB not for IDL, so, as another poster has written
| above, both these 2 GNU projects have the purpose of
| replacing certain proprietary tools, but they are intended
| for different user bases, who were previously familiar with
| those 2 different proprietary tools.
| trailbits wrote:
| IDL is a much older established language dating back to the
| '70s. So GDL would appeal to anyone needing to run or develop
| IDL code but wishing to avoid paying the license fee.
| PaulHoule wrote:
| I remember using IDL to analyze atmospheric observations made
| by satellites back in 1991.
| cbm-vic-20 wrote:
| Would be nice to have some language samples in the README.
| mountainriver wrote:
| Yeah I always hate it when projects do that. It should be the
| first thing in your README. Instead I can't even find an
| example clicking through the docs. I guess I'll pass for now
| orf wrote:
| These have to be some of the worst "clearly had time and money
| invested in them, but are totally shit" docs I've seen in a long
| while. No code samples, takes ~7 seconds to load each page and
| the "Concepts" page (a natural starting point) is blank [1].
|
| Maybe "Explore IDL routines" might have some interesting stuff?
| Nope [2]. The most concise and useful page I've found seems to
| document the "IDL _help_ Syntax" [3].
|
| I can't get over how poor these docs are.
|
| 1. https://www.l3harrisgeospatial.com/docs/idl_concepts.html
|
| 2. https://www.l3harrisgeospatial.com/docs/routines-1.html
|
| 3. https://www.l3harrisgeospatial.com/docs/idl_syntax.html
| mcluck wrote:
| I've said it before and I'll say it a thousand times more: when
| showing a language...
|
| Show. Me. The Code.
|
| I had to click through 5(!) links before I saw any code and those
| links were not terribly intuitive. No "getting started", no
| "tutorial", nothing. It seems like an interesting language but it
| baffles me how many language designers and implementers seem to
| hide the very code that they aim to use.
|
| Here is the first bit of code I could find:
| https://www.l3harrisgeospatial.com/docs/bubbleplots.html
| Rygian wrote:
| If you remove the loitering '$' at line ends, and replace ';'
| for comments with '#,' this would pass as valid Python.
| 0des wrote:
| its actually pretty decent syntax. I wonder why they wouldnt
| put it more front and center?
| necubi wrote:
| You'd only be looking at this because you already know you need
| to use IDL and want an open-source implementation. Unless you
| have a hard requirement to use it (like your data is in an IDL
| data format, or you rely on IDL libraries) there is no reason
| you would choose to over R, Python, or Julia.
| m463 wrote:
| share the resulting link!
| mcluck wrote:
| Sure thing. Edited my original post
| lloydatkinson wrote:
| And not a single hello world example anywhere. This is a common
| theme, unfortunately.
| cgb223 wrote:
| PufPufPuf wrote:
| How and why would a person that doesn't know the language,
| who just wanted to see an example to know if it interests
| them, make that contribution? "It's open source, therefore
| YOU fix it" isn't going to excite people for open source, you
| know.
| coliveira wrote:
| No open source project has the obligation to do what you
| mention. From my observation, the community that uses this
| kind of language already knows what it looks like.
| nurettin wrote:
| I worked with IDL 20 years ago. GDL at the time was somewhat
| different and the difference was great enough to prevent me from
| doing the entire thing in GDL. Great to see they made the move to
| be compatible with IDL. It has a great REPL. Easy to program.
| Could have been the python we never knew we wanted.
| wyldfire wrote:
| It's funny for me to see all these references to 'IDL' describing
| "Interactive Data Language". I had only associated the term IDL
| with 'Interface Definition Language' [1].
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_description_language
| [deleted]
| necubi wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IDL_(programming_language) is the
| one you're looking for :)
|
| It's a popular (and frankly terrible) language used in
| astronomy and astrophysics. My first (semi-professional)
| programming job was a high school internship at NASA AMES
| writing IDL to process data from the Cassini probe orbiting
| Saturn. At that time you had to use a clunky IDE for
| development and the whole toolchain was proprietary.
| MaxBarraclough wrote:
| Is this actually associated with the GNU project? The GNU folks
| aren't fond of GitHub. [0]
|
| [0] https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-
| evaluation.en.htm...
| remedan wrote:
| The Wikipedia page for GDL states that it isn't an official GNU
| package. [0] I couldn't find an explanation as to why it is
| named such.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Data_Language
| veltas wrote:
| Well they can probably get in trouble for branding as GNU,
| even if they disclaim it somewhere else. GNU is trademarked,
| for one.
| https://trademarks.justia.com/853/80/gnu-85380218.html
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-05-15 23:01 UTC)