Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2006
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*November
*December
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2006

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

Search the Archive

Re: Programming style: postfix/prefix vs. functional

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg70716] Re: Programming style: postfix/prefix vs. functional
  • From: Helen Read <hpr at together.net>
  • Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:24:24 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <eha5kn$b82$1@smc.vnet.net> <ehhpst$73r$1@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: HPR <read at math.uvm.edu>

Will Robertson wrote:
> Will Robertson wrote:
> 
>>If it's simply personal preference, what do you like to use?
> 
> 
> Thanks all, much food for thought.
> It seems pretty clear that most people prefer the shorthands.

Interesting. I don't use it myself, and find it quite difficult to read.

> I think I'm now of the opinion that if I was beginner enough in
> Mathematica, and I forgot what /@ meant after 6 months, I'd also forget
> how Map[] worked; so the advantages in simplifying the code by using
> the shorthand methods (both for reading and writing) outweigh any
> advantage of the verbosity of the named functions.

I teach calculus students to use Mathematica, and I don't show them the 
shorthand with the @ and so forth. I far prefer the Function[] notation 
for teaching.

-- 
Helen Read
University of Vermont


  • Prev by Date: Solve with dot products
  • Next by Date: Re: two questions
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: Programming style: postfix/prefix vs. functional
  • Next by thread: complex eigenvectors