MathGroup Archive 2002

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

Search the Archive

Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg36907] Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?
  • From: Steven <hattons at>
  • Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 03:31:26 -0400 (EDT)
  • Organization: Global Symmetry
  • References: <an14r5$ieq$> <an3pn5$ofg$>
  • Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at

Jens-Peer Kuska wrote:

> Hi,
> I can't understand your criticism. Open a terminal window
> and type
> the delete key work perfect, due to your terminal settings and
> a command line is the most modern interface I can imagine.
> It still comes with Mathematica 4.2 and is perfect as before.
> Regards
>   Jens

If I could use bash to edit the command line, recall the command history, 
and other sorts of things that bash is good at, that would make the command 
line attractive.  There *are* certain advantages to the gui side of things.  
For example the M-k code completion.  That can really speed things up with 
languages such as Java and C++.  I don't believe there is any fundamental 
reason such a thing could not exist with the command line.  IMHO, a well 
conceived XEmacs lisp package could provide a wonderful frontend.  I played 
around with mma.el for a few minutes, but it wasn't acting like a normal 
XEmacs package, so I switched back to cursing the Mod1<->Ctrl inversion of 
the Mathematica frontend.

I agree,  as it stands the problems of the Linux implementation of the Mathematica 
gui front end, get in the way of what really matters.  The last thing I 
want to do here is to discourage people from using the Linux release of 
Mathematica.  What I want to do is improve the overal experience for all of us.


  • Prev by Date: RE: Re: Solve simultaneous eqns
  • Next by Date: Re: timing with Play
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?
  • Next by thread: Re: Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?