Re: Opinions about the "Oneliners"
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg40439] Re: Opinions about the "Oneliners"
- From: "Albert REINER" <Use-Author-Address-Header at [127.1]>
- Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 04:00:48 -0500 (EST)
- Author-address: areiner <AT> tph <DOT> tuwien <DOT> ac <DOT> at
- Organization: mail2news@nym.alias.net
- References: <b6e7j6$85b$1@smc.vnet.net>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
> Actually, this is a pretty serious problem. We've been trying to make > Mathematica a standard language for our engineering firm, but I've > struggled for years with developing good documentation standards. The ... You might be interested in "literate programming" - any system should do well (ask at <news:comp.programming.literate>; I happen to prefer noweb <http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~nr/noweb/intro.html>, BTW); there is also a system specific for Mathematica, viz. TeX/Mathematica <http://www.agh.edu.pl/pub/tex/macros/mathematica/>, which presupposes a working emacs installation. I have no idea how well it would work on non-Unix systems, though. ... > methods difficult. I'm tempted to ban prefix and postfix notation in > packages because they can make for very opaque code. Many years ago, ... Conversely, I feel that they make for very readable code: expr // f1 // f2 shows me the expression I start from, and tells me that the functions are applied in some sequence that (hopefully) makes sense; and the @ character in /@, @@, etc. is such a nice dark blotch on the screen that it stands out visually much more prominently than square brackets (I hardly use ~f~ - usually the precedence doesn't fit for me.) Regards, Albert.