Re: Re: OOP in Mathematica
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg28933] Re: [mg28900] Re: OOP in Mathematica
- From: andrzej <andrzej at bekkoame.ne.jp>
- Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 22:27:51 -0400 (EDT)
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
I think I have to agree Jens-Peer Kuska's basic point, though I would
not express it quite as strongly. A couple of years ago I spent some
time studying Maeder's package and in particular the use made of it in
Gray's "Mastering Mathematica". I did it basically to learn what OOP was
and when I did not know anything about it I was enthusiastic about
learning to write my own programs in that style. However Gray's book
persuaded me it would be a bad idea. Chapter III of that book contains a
object oriented treatment of graph theory. Of all mathematical topics I
can think of graph theory is probably the most suited to this approach
yet I found soon that in every respect I preferred the treatment in
Skiena's "Implementing Discrete Mathematics" (the programs from which
form the Combinatorica package). I think all this amount to is the
rather obvious fact that in mathematics one is constantly defining
functions and functional programming offers the only natural way to do
so. But I expect that for many non-mathematical purposes OOP may well
Toyama International University
On Friday, May 18, 2001, at 02:13 PM, Jens-Peer Kuska wrote:
> it will *not* help you !
>> Hi everybody...
>> I have been toying with OOP(Objected-Oriented Programming) &
>> Mathematica for
>> quite some time now and I am finaly in the process of implementing an
>> package for Mathematica. I know that the main reference in this area
>> been Maeder's "Classes" package for some time now, but I always felt
>> it left
>> much to be desired.
>> So, if you used Maeder's package and/or are interested in the
>> posibility of
>> working with Objects in Mathematica I would appreciate your opinion on
>> a) If you did use Maeder's package, what do you think of it?
> An example for teaching that show OOP is a stupid concept, if
> you have a better one.
>> b) What features would YOU like to see in such a package?
> Clean functional/logic programming.
> Complete removal of all the sick object orientation.
>> c) Anything else you can think of, that might interest/help me.
> It is a shame to use such a wonderful well desinged language
> like Mathematica's language to do OOP.
>> Replies to my personal email are welcome.
>> Orestis Vantzos atelesforos at hotmail.com
Prev by Date:
RE: ListPlot vs ListPlot3D
Next by Date:
Re: Re: Creating graph with only a few data points
Previous by thread:
Re: OOP in Mathematica
Next by thread:
Re: OOP in Mathematica