MathGroup Archive 2005

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

Search the Archive

Re: Roman Maeder's Classes.m

Andrzej Kozlowski wrote:

> On 9 Dec 2005, at 19:10, Kristen W Carlson wrote:
>> Or we could ask Andrzej to explain briefly his comments: "slightest
>> liking for
>> this [Maeder] approach and I prefer the Combinatorica package by far".
>> This implies that oop is implemented in a superior way in
>> Combinatorica?
> No, that means I do not much like the whole idea of using OOP in
> Mathematica. I guess the main reason is that I find this style of
> programming so alien to the way I usually program in  Mathematica
> that I can never remember how anything works and always have to read
> the documentation from scratch. Of course I do not have such problems
> with the Combinatorica package, which is why I have always been using
> it in teaching Graph Theory and never was tempted to use Gray's
> approach based on Maeder's classes.
> Andrzej Kozlowski

A better implementation can provide an extremely intuitive and easy to use
interface.  I agree that Maeder's Classes are rather cumbersome to work
with.  It's very difficult to determine how useful a builtin, or better
implemented/integrated OOP package might be.
The Mathematica Wiki:
Math for Comp Sci
Math for the WWW:

  • Prev by Date: Re: functional programming
  • Next by Date: Re: A list of numbers without "73"
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: Re: Roman Maeder's Classes.m
  • Next by thread: Re: Roman Maeder's Classes.m