Re: Roman Maeder's Classes.m

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg63015] Re: Roman Maeder's Classes.m*From*: "Steven T. Hatton" <hattons at globalsymmetry.com>*Date*: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 04:56:36 -0500 (EST)*References*: <200512070410.XAA23737@smc.vnet.net> <200512080504.AAA11608@smc.vnet.net> <926c8d70512080926l4f55182ayda9199ccf428c70b@mail.gmail.com> <200512091010.FAA05444@smc.vnet.net> <dnecq5$stb$1@smc.vnet.net>*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

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: http://www.mathematica-users.org/ Math for Comp Sci http://www.ifi.unizh.ch/math/bmwcs/master.html Math for the WWW: http://www.w3.org/Math/

**References**:**Roman Maeder's Classes.m***From:*"Steven T. Hatton" <hattons@globalsymmetry.com>

**Re: Roman Maeder's Classes.m***From:*Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl>

**Re: Re: Roman Maeder's Classes.m***From:*Kristen W Carlson <carlsonkw@gmail.com>