RE: Re: Absolute coo

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg12752] RE: [mg12743] Re: [mg12715] Absolute coo*From*: Ersek_Ted%PAX1A at mr.nawcad.navy.mil*Date*: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 03:04:14 -0400*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Sean Ross wrote: | |Mathematica is a programming language, not a program. | I like to think of Mathematica as a program, that has a built-in programming language. How many *programming languages* let you simply do: In[1]:= Plot3D[ Sin[x y], {x, -2, 2}, {y, -2, 2}] and get a 3D graphic? We don't even have to define x, y as real numbers. A system that lets me do an algebra problem like: In[2]:=Factor[x^6-1] in one line doesn't seem like a programming language. Well given that you see Mathematica as a programming language, I can see why you are always complaining that we can't define a variable as a real, or an integer, or positive, etc. I agree it will be wonderful when we can make such statements, and this information will be used to simplify results throughout the system. However, I hope the Mathematica user will never be REQUIRED to specify the variable type before using the variables. Well maybe it is a lot easier to put labels on a graphic using (gnuplot or Axum). I don't know, I never used them. However, I bet the graphics is no where near as flexible as Mathematica graphics. I bet the numerical capabilities are pale compared to Mathematica numerics. I bet there are many areas where Mathematica is easier to use than these other applications. Ted Ersek