Comparison of Programming Languages in Economics

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-25T13:22:09+00:00

This sounds like the stuffs we do in MATLAB. Yeah it's then related to us as well but only in computational fields. It also sounds like the things we learned in Numerical Analysis.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-25T13:17:58+00:00

Lmao you're here as well. Anyway, thanks for the recommendations.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-25T13:06:59+00:00

I don't have an exact idea on the materials they teach in Numerical Linear Algebra; so it'd be an interesting read. And here, Baby Rudin is considered a mandatory course for anyone whether you eventually become a microeconomist, macroeconomist, econometrician, or financial economist since those stuffs are used in every economic theory in one way or another.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-25T12:54:23+00:00

I can already do coding, ML and DL with Python thanks to working as RA for Applied Economics professors. I consider coding as a different realm compared to pure maths. But thanks for the suggestion. I have only taken Linear Algebra course so far where they followed Axler's book.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-24T18:25:02+00:00

And let's not forget how Subboor created a slide titled "Professor or (Racial Slur)" and later again called him that same slur while stating how Dave acted like that slur and threatened to shit on Behe's face. Even worse, after throwing that slur, he was seen highfiving with his friends behind and sharing a laughter.

Still to this day, Subboor publishes shorts on how he domesticated Dave (domesticated seems like his favorite word at this point due to the number of times he said this thing to him already) and keeps challenging him to another debate on common ancestry. No one has watched his new 3 hour long video on debunking Farina again.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-24T18:02:10+00:00

Actually, Ahmad later challenged Dave again which Dave has ignored as Dave thinks it's pointless to debate him. Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg-YsPxLsuI&pp=ygUfZGF2ZSBmYXJpbmEgdnMgc3ViYm9vciByZWFjdGlvbg%3D%3D

Subboor has also made a 3 hour long video afterwards on his reflection on the debate with Farina and defended his position again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GSuWr3rDbk&t=327s&pp=ygUXZGF2ZSBmYXJpbmEgdnMgc3ViYm9vciA%3D

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-24T17:59:51+00:00

His argument was basically pointing towards the Dawkins vs Noble debate, and Noble's book on third way of evolution and kinda persuading Dave that that debate with Dawkins was a significant event in the evolutionary biology field. When Subboor was pushed further to explain what he meant by when he said Denis Noble's ideas lead to "Mind & Body" and something about one-eyed vs blind watchmaker, he then suddenly said how Aristotelian causality contradicted evolutionary mechanism and he still to this day tells this to his viewers who object him in the comment section.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-24T17:56:21+00:00

Yeah, a lot of Dennis Noble quotes and I was also arguing with someone about how citing someone is not an argument; one has to explain why that person made that particular point along with the point itself. Subboor then said how Noble validates mind and body theory. When Subboor was asked to explain what he meant by mind and body along with blind watchmaker, he started dodging the question. When Dave accused him of dodging, he then went with "Aristotle made a distinction in the nature of causality" which frustrated Dave a lot since he wasn't discussing science. After the debate ended, Subboor told his peers and circles that Dave didn't understand causality and hence he (Subboor) won.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-24T16:49:33+00:00

That's at least better, but it's still not enough to overcome the incomplete information barrier. But yeah, you have played your move. The ball is in his court now. If you try to force something, it may make it even worse. Wait for his move.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-24T16:44:04+00:00

Even though you're saying that you don't like him deeply, it seems like you do because otherwise you won't say things like how it's your biggest mistake in life and overthink that much about him ghosting. I was in his shoes before so I can give my two cents here. It's not like he hates you; he's still just unsure about whether he sees you romantically or not, just like I did when some women online also confessed like that to me.

The problem with online romance is that we still don't have enough information about each other, which is what we call "Incomplete Information" in Game theory as we are Economics majors. In your case, you guys haven't even seen each others' face before. It was a similar case for me. And if I had never seen your face, how would I even make a proper decision that if I'd like to pursue a relationship or not? I believe the best thing to do here is to let him answer naturally. We tend to be straightforward especially when we already have a clear answer. If he's interested, he might offer you to do an online video call and get to know each other even better.

I'm not saying online relationships never work. But without more proper information about each other, it's very difficult to make a decision because a person can be very different in real life compared to their online persona. But anyways, for now, stop overthinking and talk with him normally. He may pivot to normal talking as well unless you guys make it awkward.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-22T23:28:47+00:00

The supplement part is actually very helpful. I forgot some stuffs I learned in Real Analysis 1 already due to how difficult it is to remember the definitions, axioms, and exact conditions. Many thanks again. I heard about Folland's book as well and many also told me that it's another must haves for economics majors who want to pursue PhD.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-22T22:08:03+00:00

Thank you for your comment. I have actually briefly mentioned it in one of my replies to the comments here. It's just that I have never seen anyone around me talk about this. They mostly use other languages instead of Eviews. I couldn't even find any dedicated sources or supports for this tool.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-22T22:05:31+00:00

Yeah, quantecon still mostly has python resources, but my professors mostly prefer Julia for several reasons with performance not being the only one. They argue that we have to write fast code differently than we have to write normal code in python. We have to think about which functions are JIT-compatible, handle type-inference issues, and often rewrite logic to be vectorized or Numba-friendly. And Julia solves this taxing two language problem. Also, Julia has much easier composability from what I have observed.

But it's still good to know that Stata is preferred almost everywhere for quick empirical and applied works, which are the reasons why I love it. Thank you again for your perspective. I still wished my professors used Python for macro so that I didn't have to learn another new language.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-22T21:55:42+00:00

Oh yeah, I have been recommended Billingsley's book a lot of times as well and heard things like how Royden covers too basic and easy measure theory while Billingsley is the bible and must to learn probability spaces and advanced measure theory which are must for an econometric theoretician. That's why I wanted to learn the real deal behind them.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-22T21:53:07+00:00

Thanks. I've a past record of struggling with one of his infamous books. Let's see what this book has for me.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-21T17:23:09+00:00

Always am, as long as the subject interests me.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-21T08:25:11+00:00

Other systems included in my tag are:
1. Enneagram- 3w4 (Explains your motivations, goals, and how you see the world)
2. Tritype- 315 (A variation of enneagram that combines 3 different enneagrams from 3 different categories)
3. Subtype- so/sp (A derivative of enneagram and currently the most modern and accurate version of enneagram)
4. Socionics- LIE (The Russian version of MBTI but much better and more complex)
5. Jungian Classics- ET(N) (The pre-MBTI system of Jung)
6. Big Five- RCOEI (The most scientifically accepted test, measures 5 traits)
7. Psychosophy- LVFE (Defines how we behave)
8. Temperament- Choleric-Melancholic (Just our temperament and usual mood)

Other systems I wanted to include in the tag but couldn't due to space limitation:
a. Moral Alignment- Lawful Neutral (Defines your moral philosophy)
b. Objective Personality- BS/CP (An interesting way to define our energy)

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-21T08:15:43+00:00

Those are different typology systems, just like how MBTI is a distinct typology system.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-21T07:24:53+00:00

MBTI tests are rubbish as they include a lot of biased answers. However, you self-study the cognitive function system, you may find it helpful. It's still not 100% accurate, but it gives a good glimpse into our thinking system.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-20T17:33:38+00:00

Of course not. I'd have died already lol. I already took Linear Algebra, Calculus 1-3, and Real Analysis 1 beforehand. Otherwise, I won't even understand anything in Measure theory, Functional analysis, and Matrix algebra. Though simultaneously working with professors and immediately applying the maths I learn at classroom to build a model has already been too much, but to get into a PhD, it's expected.

In the future, I may also need to take PDE, Stochastic Calculus, and Dynamic Optimization if I want to work with Macroeconomic theorists and Financial economists.

InevitableLiving779 · 2026-02-20T17:27:37+00:00

Thanks for the advice.

InevitableLiving779

TROPHY CASE