microacg wrote:Personally (have bs in physics) my plan is to learn python (I have some coding experience from high school but that's it) until I'm pretty comfortable with it, then transition to whichever will be the most helpful at that point. Python seems to have the easiest syntax to learn but won't be sufficient if I end up using programming a lot as a grad student.
bfollinprm wrote:My guess is python will be the language of choice for almost every physicist in the next 10 years, with only a small few actually working on the c++ code that forms the backbone of most analysis packages.
TakeruK wrote:bfollinprm wrote:My guess is python will be the language of choice for almost every physicist in the next 10 years, with only a small few actually working on the c++ code that forms the backbone of most analysis packages.
I was going to say this myself too! But a lot of times you might also have to work with whatever code you're given. In my case, it means I get to work with FORTRAN77, a language 10 years older than me!
bfollinprm wrote:mrrsnhtl wrote:Learn C, all the rest are derivatives, kind of..
Not really true, object oriented maybe, but idl and numpy'd python are totally different.
mrrsnhtl wrote:Well, to me, python and similar ones are developed for the non-programmers. No doubt that it is way useful for physical (or chemical, aeronautical, etc.) applications. Yet, C dwells at the heart of the object. Always nice to grasp fundamentals..
bfollinprm wrote:..C and Java are popular not because they're always the best or even representative, but because they're taught in computer science, are fairly extendible, and easier to understand than more natural machine-language extensions like Lisp and Haskell..
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest