Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- personal:blog:2017:0203_jump_for_gams_users [2023/12/22 10:37] – [Further help] COMPLETED UPDATING OF THE PAGE antonello
+++ personal:blog:2017:0203_jump_for_gams_users [2025/05/02 09:41] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 You have plenty of development environment to choose from (e.g. Jupiter, Juno), a clear modern language, the possibility to interface your model with third party libraries.. all of this basically for free.\\
 It is also, at least for my user case, much faster than GAMS. Aside the preparation of the model to pass to the solver, where it is roughly equivalent, in the solver execution I can benefit of having on my system a version of IPOPT compiled with the much more performing ma27 linear solver, while for GAMS I would have to rely on the embedded version that is compiled with the MUMPS linear solver. That's part of the flexibility you gain in using JuMP in place of GAMS.
-That's said, for people that don't need such flexibility, the package automatically install a local pre-compiled version of the solver, so just adding the package relative to the solver is enough to start writing the model. Even more, for people that doesn't care too much about performances, there is a service on [[https://juliabox.com|JuliaBox.com]] that allows to run Julia/JuMP scripts for free in the browser, without anything to install on the local computer.
+That's said, for people that don't need such flexibility, the package automatically install a local pre-compiled version of the solver, so just adding the package relative to the solver is enough to start writing the model.