Re: Re: Recommendations for a programming book?

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg55843] Re: [mg55778] Re: Recommendations for a programming book?*From*: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl>*Date*: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 07:15:02 -0400 (EDT)*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

I forgot to mention "Introduction to Programming with Mathematica" by Gaylord, Kamin, and Wellin, which I used for several years as a textbook for a course on Mathematica programming. It is a highly recommended introduction; very clearly written and it actually has a few non trivial programing examples, even though it is nowhere near as deep as Michael Trott's book. Also, the lest paragraph of my message below should have read: As for Wolfram's book; well I think trying to learn Matheamtica from it is a bit like trying to learn mathematics from an encyclopedia; I do not know anyone who has got very far with this approach. But, as a basic reference it has no substitute. Andrzej Kozlowski On 7 Apr 2005, at 00:38, Andrzej Kozlowski wrote: > I think I have read almost all books on programming in Mathematica > and find Michael Trott's book by far the most interesting. Maeder's > book is elegantly written but actually you do not need it to learn how > to write good packages or how to document them: a better method is to > select one or two standard packages provided with Mathematica and > study them carefully. To me this seems a relatively trivial issue, not > worth a whole book. Maeder's two books entitles The Mathematica > Programmer I and II, based on his articles in the Mathematica Journal > are in many ways more interesting. > Wagner's book is a good book on programming but it hardly shows you > how to solve a serious problem. For the latter Mastering Mathematica > by Gray is better but it comes nowhere near Michael's book. The value > of Michael's book is not really that there are "things in there that > are no where else" but rather that shows how to use Mathematica to > solve problems about which it is sometimes hard to believe that they > can even tackled with a computer program. It is completely wrong to > say that is has "a huge number of unnecessary references". The worked > out problems and exercises touch on countless topics in Mathematics > and physics and the references are needed for the necessary > background. I doubt that there is anyone who knows more than a > fraction of the material involved; references are a must in this sort > of work. > As for Wolfram's book; well I think trying to learn Matheamtica form > it is a bit like trying to learn mathematics form an; I do not know > anyone who has got very far with this approach. But, as a basic > reference it has no substitute. > > Andrzej Kozlowski > > > > > On 6 Apr 2005, at 09:11, David Bailey wrote: > >> I remember when I first obtained Mathematica, how impressed I was with >> Stephen's book. I think the examples are particularly well chosen - >> not >> too simple as to fail to illustrate what a command does, but not so >> complicated that you have to work hard to understand them. >> >> Because the book with the software is so good, it does seem hard to >> beat >> it! I have yet to read Michael Trott's book, and what you say is >> interesting. I wonder if anyone else can offer an opinion. >> >> As regards such things as checking that a function does not >> inadvertently access global variables, I think this is something for a >> piece of checking software to enforce - it is not so much a lack of >> knowledge, but a mistake that you are trying to eliminate. >> >> David Bailey >> dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk >> >> >