Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive

MathGroup Archive 2002

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: OO in Mathematica

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg37661] Re: [mg37635] Re: OO in Mathematica
  • From: jmt <jmt at dxdydz.net>
  • Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 02:13:54 -0500 (EST)
  • References: <4EDE40BF-ECCD-11D6-B0A7-00039311C1CC@tuins.ac.jp> <aqb0vt$mha$1@smc.vnet.net> <200211071141.GAA00777@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: jmt at dxdydz.net
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
The Optica package :

http://www.wolfram.com/products/applications/optica/
and
http://www.mathsource.com/Content/Applications/Physics/0207-605

shows interesting approaches in this matter.


On Thursday 07 November 2002 12:41, Jens-Peer Kuska wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> you are right, I have never written a Mathematica "program"
> and I don't know what is can be. Since there is no "program"
> it can't have any structure. You can have functions but I have
> never written a function with more than ca 30 statements.
> There is no reason to "structure" a Mathematica function that
> has typical 5--10 statements.
> 
> It seems that larger packages work perfectly right
> without any object oriented extension -- how can this
> happen ?
> 
> And yes I mean functional programming when I say
> "functional programming". Every 
> real functional/logic programming language
> has an assigment. The assigment is not needed
> but it save some computation time.  Mathematica
> has also functions like While[] only for 
> efficiency. 
> 
> Regards
>   Jens
> 
> 
> 
> Hermann Schmitt wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > you must differentiate between instructions and the structuring of 
programs.
> > If you write a small program the structure of the program is no issue. 
But I
> > think, that Mathematica is one of the best programming languages, you can
> > also program larger programs/applications with Mathematica. Then the
> > structuring of the program/the applications is an issue. You ignore the
> > problems of structuring.
> > Additionally, your usage of the notion "functional programming" is wrong. 
If
> > you read in the literature, you will see, that functional programming is
> > programming only with functions and expressions and without variables and
> > without the assignement of values to variables. I think, you  can program 
in
> > this way in Mathematica, but I do not think, that you mean this.
> > Hermann
> 
>
  • Prev by Date: Re: Kalman Filter &Smoother, Subspace Identification
  • Next by Date: RE: RE: RE: Re: Seemingly simple gridbox question
  • Previous by thread: Re: OO in Mathematica
  • Next by thread: Re: Re: OO in Mathematica