[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Mathematica Programmer vs. Programming in Mathematica
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg63129] Re: Mathematica Programmer vs. Programming in Mathematica
*From*: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl>
*Date*: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 03:06:37 -0500 (EST)
*References*: <200512130841.DAA08238@smc.vnet.net> <dnopbs$2g9$1@smc.vnet.net> <200512142222.jBEMMaKZ009591@ljosalfr.globalsymmetry.com>
*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
On 15 Dec 2005, at 07:22, Steven T. Hatton wrote:
>
> He also says: " It is to be hoped that there will soon be a
> hard-wired version in the underlying Mathematica C code."
It seems prety obvious now it is not going to happen. I for one do
not regret it.
>
>
>> Both volumes of "The Mathematica Programmer" are very different from
>> "Programing in Mathematica". The latter book is actually devoted
>> entirely to writing Mathematica packages and isn't a particularly
>> good guide to other aspects of Mathematica programming (it was the
>> first book on Mathematica programming I ever read and I don't think I
>> learnt very much from it).
>
> I have read from several different books on Mathematica over the
> years.
> None of them provide a very good introduction. I believe part of the
> problem is that the authors tend to avoid explaining what makes
> Mathematica
> "functions" different from functions in languages such as C.
> Instead, they
> seem to focus on the similarities. A few diagrams such as are
> found in
> _Interpretation of Computer Programs_ by Abelson and Sussman, and an
> accompanying general description of the process of evaluation would
> have
> been of great value to me.
I wonder what value there would be in trying to explain what makes
Mathematica "functions" different from functions in languages such as
C in a book addressed to readers most of whom have no knowledge of C
and are not particualry interested in getting it?
The "Structure and INterpretation of Computer Programs" is a good
book; I actaully learnt a lot about Mathematica form it ;-) One good
thing about it is that it leaves all mention of C to the fotnotes and
the exercies (see in particualrl page 610) for those who are
interested only.
>
> I have gained a lot from _Programming in Mathematica_. I don't
> agree that
> it is devoted entirely to writing Mathematica Packages. To me that is
> similar to saying something like '_The C++ Programming Language,
> Special
> Edition_" is entirely about creating namespaces'. Packages are
> merely a
> (good) means of organizing code in Mathematica. Most of what Maeder
> presents could easily be done in the Global` context.
O.K., I guess I exaggerated somewhat. In fact Programming in
Mathematica is a very elegantly written book that gives a good idea
of the possibilities of Mathematica programming. Since I have bought
three editions of it (for Mathematica versions 1, 2 and 4) obviously
I must have found something of value in it. Nevertheless I still do
not think this is a good book to start learning Mathematica
programming form. On the other after I read Wagner's book I could
easily read Programming in Mathematica and other Mathematica books
and although I found useful things in them I don't think I ever
discovered any more fundamental principles I that were somehow missed
by Wagner.
>
> [...]
>> The
>> explanation is pretty compressed: less than one page long.
>
> I'm hoping there is sufficient development in the preceding
> chapters to
> explain his implementation. I have a used copy on order.
As I and others have already explained: each chapter is on a totally
different topic. They are unrelated and and do not naturally lead
from one to another.
>
>> The package is used again in Maeder's book "Computer Science with
>> Mathematica" in the chapter on object oriented programming but again
>> Maeder writes that the exact way how is works is irrelevant and
>> refers the interested reader to the Mathematica Programmer.
>
> He actually says it is "unimportant for our applications of object
> oriented
> programming." _Computer Science with Mathematica_ was one of the
> books I
> read without much depth of understanding due to my lack of a solid
> grasp of
> how Mathematica works differently from traditional procedural and
> functional languages.
>
I don't understand you here, though I suspect that is because our
background and interests are quite different.
I have never had much interest in "how Mathematica works
differently from traditional procedural and functional languages" and
honestly do not have much now either. I don't think not knowing that
was ever any obstacle to my understanding of Mathematica. I knew a
bit of Lisp at the time when I started learning Mathematica (and that
was entirely due to reading Chaitin's "algorithmic Information
Theory" , which of course does not give you any knowledge of
"practical" Lisp) and as a result I made the mistake of trying to
program in too Lisp like style, before I realised how dreadfully
inefficient such programs are in Mathematica (due to the sort of
things mentioned by Jon Harrop). I guess if I had known even less
Lisp my progress would have been faster ;-)
In fact my approach was entirely different from yours. I had been
using Mathematica for a number of years without any programming but
then I got an idea about a specific project I wanted to implement for
the classes I was teaching. I found that I had to learn to program to
do that. I could not find any information that I needed in the
Mathematica book (it was of course all there, but the problem was I
did not know how to look for it).
After reading "Programming in Mathematica" I was not much closer.
But after I read David Wagner's book it became almost trivial to
implement my project; the whole program turned out to be less than a
page long. Since then I have read or at least looked at lots of
Mathematica books and I learnt many interesting tricks (although not
as many as I learnt from the MathGroup, particularly from Allan
Hayes, Carl Woll and Hartmut Wolf not to mention WRI employees). I
also read "The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs"
following a suggestion by Richard Fateman (I am grateful for
that ;-)). That was, I think, the only books on programing other
than Mathematica programing that I have fully read or want to read
(I am not counting books on algorithmic algebra, like Mishra,
Akritas, etc, which I consider part of mathematics , or general
books on algorithms like those by Knuth, Sedgewick, etc). I enjoyed
it and it gave me some insight but that is enough. I think I know now
as much about this subject as I need or want to know.
It's a bit like with research in mathematics: there is a point at
which you have to stop enlarging your "general knowledge",most of
which you won't be able to use and which is always affected by the
"The more I study the more I know. The more I know the more I forget.
The more I forget the less I know. " syndrome, and start working on
your own specific problems.
Andrzej Kozlowski
Prev by Date:
**Re: Mathematica Programmer vs. Programming in Mathematica**
Next by Date:
**Re: Output a list of keywords**
Previous by thread:
**Re: Mathematica Programmer vs. Programming in Mathematica**
Next by thread:
**Re: Mathematica Programmer vs. Programming in Mathematica**
| |