Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg36907] Re: Are configuration & UI better in 4.2?
- From: Steven <hattons at speakeasy.net>
- Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 03:31:26 -0400 (EDT)
- Organization: Global Symmetry
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Jens-Peer Kuska wrote: > Hi, > > I can't understand your criticism. Open a terminal window > and type > >>math > > 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. STH