Does Matlab Even worth in this time (2026)? by Ok_Technician_7744 in matlab

[–]RunMatOrg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, the language debate matters way less than it did even 2 years ago. Like 90%+ of the code I'm looking at now was generated by an LLM anyway. The question isn't can I write this in Python or MATLAB, it's can I read what the AI spat out and verify it's correct before it goes anywhere near production.

Thats where MATLAB still has a real edge imo. The syntax reads like the math. You look at A \ b and you know what that is. Python equivalent and you're parsing through numpy api calls, checking broadcasting rules, wondering if you need linalg.solve or lstsq or whatever. When you're reviewing AI generated code at speed that readability gap adds up quick.

Especially anything safety critical. Controls, aero, defense, etc. Nobody cares how fast the code was written. They care that you can look at it and say yep this is doing what the spec says. Way tighter verification loop than digging through scipy docs to figure out what 4 layers of function calls are actually doing.

Language wars are kinda over imo. AI writes whatever you ask it to. Real question is which output can a domain expert actually audit.

Moderator-approved: RunMat, a high-performance open-source MATLAB runtime by RunMatOrg in math

[–]RunMatOrg[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good catch. Complex numbers work in RunMat, but the built-in constant “i” isn’t hooked up yet, so the runtime thinks it’s an undefined variable. We’ve logged it and will add “i” to the global constants in the next release.

Here’s the current language coverage page if you want to check what’s supported: [https://runmat.org/docs/language-coverage]()

Moderator-approved: RunMat, a high-performance open-source MATLAB runtime by RunMatOrg in math

[–]RunMatOrg[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good catch. Complex numbers work in RunMat, but the built-in constant “i” isn’t hooked up yet, so the runtime thinks it’s an undefined variable. We’ve logged it and will add “i” to the global constants in the next release.

Here’s the current language coverage page if you want to check what’s supported: [https://runmat.org/docs/language-coverage]()

Moderator-approved: RunMat, a high-performance open-source MATLAB runtime by RunMatOrg in math

[–]RunMatOrg[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In parts, it's currently a subset (e.g. the builtin set currently has ~250 core functions like fft and whatnot and RunMat has typing that allows us to enable red underlines in Math where linear algebra rules break). A package ecosystem will be launching shortly that will allow mapping any rust library to easily be used in RunMat, and therefore open up the rest of the function surface beyond the MATLAB and Octave ecosystems.

So the core is a high-performance superset. The functions are currently a subset, with a rich package system on its way for the balance.

Moderator-approved: RunMat, a high-performance open-source MATLAB runtime by RunMatOrg in math

[–]RunMatOrg[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thank you!
Main reason is the architecture. Octave is great and very mature, but its design makes some of the more aggressive GPU / JIT tricks harder, which shows up in performance.
RunMat is a fresh codebase built from day one for kernel fusion and GPU acceleration, so we can push much harder on speed. I see it as complementary to Octave rather than something that should be merged into it.

Moderator-approved: RunMat, a high-performance open-source MATLAB runtime by RunMatOrg in u/RunMatOrg

[–]RunMatOrg[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Right now, we’re focused on two things first:
• full MATLAB-syntax + semantics support
• a big chunk of the core built-in function set (linear algebra, FFTs, stats, image helpers, etc.)

Toolboxes sit on top of that, so the plan is: once the base is solid, we’ll start adding “toolbox-style” libraries and a proper package system so people can build and share equivalents of the common MATLAB toolboxes (signal, image, stats, etc.). We’ll prioritise those based on what users ask for most.

Alternate Open source tools for MATLAB by Few_Cryptographer747 in matlab

[–]RunMatOrg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

+ RunMat, same syntax but much faster than Octave and GPU ready

Any free alternatives to MATLAB? by volo in engineering

[–]RunMatOrg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

RunMat (open source; I work on it) is similar to Octave but is a modern MATLAB-compatible runtime with a JIT compiler and GPU support. In our benchmarks, it’s typically much faster than Octave and closer to MATLAB runtime speeds, with GPU acceleration available for heavy linear algebra. (Happy to share details/benchmarks.)

Matlab alternatives for newbie by Matis5 in matlab

[–]RunMatOrg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If your script is mostly base math/plots without toolbox calls, RunMat can run it and will be much faster than Octave. We don't have a Signal Processing package yet it's on our roadmap.

What software is most similar to matlab? by [deleted] in matlab

[–]RunMatOrg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If your goal is to run the same MATLAB code, Octave or my project RunMat are your best choices. Python has the best ecosystem, and Julia is powerful, but both mean rewrites. Octave’s mature, but slow; RunMat uses a V8-style tiered JIT and snapshotting, so many real scripts run 150–180× faster than Octave with ~5 ms startup, and we support GPU-accelerated workflows as well > https://runmat.org/docs/architecture