As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I am currently converting some R code into C++ code, and I need a “good” C++ Random Decision Forest implementation.
So far I found three big implementation (tmva, alglib and openCv), some “small/outdated” ones (like librf), and I need to choose one of them:
Do you guys have some good/bad experiences and/or some recommendations about those libraries (or maybe some other ones)? For example, the simplicity of use, the portability, the memory use, the speed, the readability of the error messages, the bugs(?), the comments about choices in the implementation, etc.
If you want to know, I am working with Visual Studio but my code is (and should stay) compatible with Linux. The speed and memory usage are very important for me since I will compute and keep in memory a large amount of random Forests. The code that I am developing is a machine learning algorithm for symbolic time sequences.
Thank you in advance,
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
The advent of quantum computers could still be decades from now. Nevertheless, because software gets incredibly complex these days, it would be good to know if C++, one of the most used programming languages to develop such software, is able to project itself into the future where quantum computing is a norm and, in addition to portability across platforms, ensure portability of such software over decades.
Quantum computing will never be "the norm". It's not suitable for everything. It's suitable for solving some problems that are intractible with conventional algorithms, but we won't just be throwing it at everything, running our little C++ utilities on quantum computers.
So, no, I don't think so.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I'm an engineering student and I have a couple classes about different complex math problems and how to solve them exactly and numerically (approximation) using various algorithms. We have focused more on the actual math and the ideas of the solutions than implementations of them. The most of these that I have seen are written in C++. For some reason I don't really like C++ and I have fallen completely in love with Objective-C. (I own an apple computer)
Is it to much of a difference in efficiency between these to languages? I'm not planning on solving 40.000x40.000 navier-stokes equation systems, just some little/little-medium instances of practical problems. Most off the problems of interest are P-problems and for the NP-Hard good heuristics would be fine.
I am obligated to learn yet another programming language, or should I just go with Objective-C, a language that I'm very familiar with nowadays.
For Math you have another languages like:
R for statistic
Octave for matrices and vectors
Maxima as CAS
SciPy for numeric computations
The God of all mathematics computations FORTRAN
Use right tool for right thing, and focus on idea not on algorithm (as you said).
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I can say I am an intermediate programmer in C/C++. I am trying to find a website (documents; anything) which hosts good puzzles (or similar) for C and C++. My objective is to experience mind teasers kind of things for C and C++. And certainly not any interview kind of questions. I would want to improve my techniques in C/C++, during a situation to solve a problem, or during implementation of an algorithm, dealing with specific logics; etc.
Second, I am also looking into new, simple and innovative problems (just problems, to improve problem solving) which can be practiced in C and C++. For example, implementing shift rotate functionality (this is very basic, but will teach you in-depth bit handling), and to a advanced level like graphs; etc.
Basically, to address I am expecting one, to improve my C/C++ skills, and two, to improve problem solving skills using C/C++.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Please, help me with choosing a library for C++ that can provide with high performance calculations in linear algebra.
Can you please share your experience with Armadillo library (http://arma.sourceforge.net/)
Thanks in advance!
I'd choose between Eigen or Sonys vectormath library ( google for vectormath aos , can't seem to find a direct download but it's a part of bullet ). Sonys library has less bells & whistles, a tad more inconvenient syntax, but it's fast, especially for their own platforms. Sonys library is limited to the subset of linear algebra used for games however, matrices doesn't go beyond 4x4 for example.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
Does anyone know of a really rock solid C++ library for suffix tries? Other than the one in Mummer?
Ideally, I'd like:
Some concept of concurrency.
Good caching behavior.
Permissive license.
Support for arbitrary alphabets.
Being a bioinformatician, my pick would be SeqAn (check out the sequence index section). It implements a lazy suffix tree and an enhanced suffix array (an equivalent data structure), both of which have good cache behaviour.
Having actually used and then forgotten PATL, I'd like to tuck in a link in an answer.
http://code.google.com/p/patl/
It's got a couple really distinct features, and is generally pleasant reading as well.
Most likely this is a tutorial but IMO worth reading and with source code: http://marknelson.us/1996/08/01/suffix-trees.