When I do commit, I write up the title of what I did, and describe it, and then use periods for related commits. Just easier.
When I do commit, I write up the title of what I did, and describe it, and then use periods for related commits. Just easier.
I’m just glad I have other options than just Python. Am not afraid of writing my solutions either. I rarely use Python these day.
For small projects, rewriting is often superb. It allows us to reorganize a mess, apply new knowledge, add neat features and doodads, etc.
This. I’m coding to contribute to a open-source software with very small amount of coders, and with a non-mainstream Domain-Specific Language. A lot of the code I did before has been proven to work from times to time, but they all could benefit from better outputs and better GUI. So, I end up reengineering the entire and that’ll take a really long time, however, I do a lot of tests to ensure it works.
I been meaning to learn Ruby to get around using Python. I like Ruby syntax better.
Coming from some one who used 4 different languages (C#, C++, Python, and G’MIC), I just feel more comfortable when there’s a explicit end blocks, which is why I don’t like Python. Of all of those languages, only Python does not make that explicit end block which is off-putting in my opinion, and there isn’t any other options with the similar role to Python.
You mean a interpretative language with similar role to Python, but more like Rust/C++ style? I actually want that so that I can ditch Python even if I learned it and use this instead.
I kind of like it. I can understand where it start and end.
Chances are there’s probably something similar to dictionary in Python in your languages or at least it’s a import/#include away. Although I don’t use general programming languages at all, in my used language (G’MIC), I do something like dict$var=input
where $var
is a defined variable, and this way I can access input by doing ${dict$var}
and that’s similar to Python dictionary. In C++, there’s hash table implementation out there via github. That being said, there are sometimes when you don’t need a hashtable dependent on the hashmap, and sometimes, it’s just as simple as basic mathematics to access data.
Seems like a good idea, I’m hoping that the syntax is sane. As far as languages goes, I think you’re missing out on G’MIC to compare as it does have things like FFT and other tools all for image processing which is just part of digital signal processing. And then, there’s Python with libraries and so on.
I only stick with these:
Easy.
For raster graphics image processing, I’d highly recommend G’MIC. Otherwise, Python and especially for string using regex library. I wish there was a vector graphics version of G’MIC.
From some one who used Python as it was the easiest solution to few of my problems, and having to experience languages with brackets and/or endif/fi/done as ways to limit scope, I find that having things like brackets and/or scope terminators easier to parse and less error-prone. I’m thinking about moving on to Ruby whenever I had a need where Python would be a good choice, but the time it takes for me to understand a new language is blocking me from that.
Well, artists would disagree on that point, and I do agree with the artist. I do think ML at this current state and near future do have a limit. I can’t see ML doing anything complicated in 3D like a CAD automobile any time soon.
My crazy take is that there needs to be a interpretative language alternative to Python which uses brackets to define scope and/or things like elif/else/fi/endif/done. Much easier that way in my opinion, and the “;” shouldn’t be necessary. I’m used to Python, but if I had another language which can be used to serve similar purpose to Python with those features, I would never code in Python again when it comes up.
Having to code in Julia and G’MIC (Domain-Specific Interpretative language that is arguably the most flexible for raster graphics content creation and editing), they’re the closest to there, but they’re more suitable for their respective domain than generic ones.
I’m using G’MIC for raster-graphic image-processing, but I can do other things in it too with ease. I feel this post so much.
Open3D and PCL falls under independent programming language libraries, correct?
If you have any luck with it, these are what you should put in:
Here’s some list I have in mind:
Python specific Libraries:
Independent Programming Language Libraries:
Domain-Specific Coding Language for image processing/computer vision
This is why I started a thread for coding with image processing languages and libraries within community request. It did not turn out well.
Hmm, I think I will give it a star in case I need something like this. I did use regex enough to know how it works though I do have a offline regex101 software to aid into that.
I use Levels filter tool for that in Krita. Already non-destructive.