cepl VS magicl

CEPL is great for something more advanced.

https://github.com/cbaggers/cepl (in Common Lisp - graphics and translating to GLSL shaders)

https://github.com/cbaggers/cepl There are a lot of videos of this being used, link is in the project's README.

I used to write software for image generators using GLSL and so I used to do some graphics projects using C, OpenGL, and GLSL. Later I discovered CEPL, which gave me a REPL to do GLSL-like graphics pipelines. That was an improvement but I don't find GLSL fun. But then I discovered April and APL in general and now I can dabble with image processing whenever I feel like it with minimal ceremony.

CEPL: A lispy and REPL-friendly Common Lisp library for working with OpenGL\ (8 comments)

If I was doing a course in computer graphics today I would sidequest with April and CEPL.

(Link didn't work for me)

https://github.com/quil-lang/magicl/blob/master/src/high-lev...

use MAGICL. [1] It is optionally and transparently accelerated by BLAS/LAPACK.

[1] https://github.com/quil-lang/magicl/blob/master/doc/high-lev...

Maybe have a look at how magicl does this?

This is essentially the first option, which is already supported by MAGICL by loading MAGICL/EXT-LAPACK [1].

[1] https://github.com/quil-lang/magicl#extensions

I think what the magicl team has done is brilliant - allowing multiple implementations is awesome.

Second up is magicl, especially useful if performance is a concern. This might not be as extensive as numcl, but it's been battle tested in the industry over the last decade or so. Because this uses generic functions, so long as you are using not-very-small arrays, performance should not be a concern for you. And even if you are, you could write your own functions that use the low-level functions that magicl's backends define. Otherwise performance can be at par with numpy.

This Dev How-To describes (I hope in enough detail) how to add these specialized routines to MAGICL.

I agree... and I do don't want be the person who has not rallied. I just took a look at guicho's issue from 2019. And here, you yourself have admitted that the high level interface is less than ideal and needs more work. However, the very point that magicl is an industry standard could imply that potentially radical backward-incompatible changes can be hard. But, honestly, I want to discuss this, time permitting!

Common Lisp is a great language to build new tools for data science, but currently has pretty awful library support existing data science workflows. Common Lisp is sorely lacking in high-quality statistics, plotting, and sparse arrays. There’s been a long work-in-progress library to bring flexible and high-performance linear algebra to Lisp, but it needs more contributors.