RE: Re: Mathematica Documentation
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg38216] RE: [mg38160] Re: Mathematica Documentation
- From: "David Park" <djmp at earthlink.net>
- Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 03:31:39 -0500 (EST)
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Dave, I disagree. I think that Mathematica has very good documentation and that is one of its strong points. All of the principal commands have individual Help pages and also their individual usage messages. It is easy to get to them. The book index and master index are very long. One of the best features is that the user can write his own documentation for his own packages and completely integrate it with the standard documentation. Yes, the documentation is not completely perfect - but this is a massive piece of software. As with any program it does take new users a little while to find their way around. My experience is that Mathematica has the best documentation of any program I have used (mainly things like Word and Excel). David Park djmp at earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/ From: DGolber [mailto:dgolber at aol.com] To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net > >> Have an entry under "Graphics Primitives" >> Have an entry under "Primitives" >> Have an entry under "Graphics Directives" >> Have an entry under "Directives" > >............ > >Dave, > >I almost always use the on line Help Browser > >Set the category to Master Index and these are found. > >The first three are in the printed book's index, > >-- >Allan > I type "primitives" in the Master Index and get section 2.9.1, which does not have a list of all the primitives. Yes, of course I found it sooner or later. But that's not a good index. All I can say is that, when someone asks me about Mathematica, I'll say it is hard to use for many reasons, and one of them is the poor documentation. Dave Golber
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RE: Re: Mathematica Documentation
- From: Kirk Reinholtz <kirk.reinholtz@jpl.nasa.gov>
- Re: RE: Re: Mathematica Documentation