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

Re: Why use Java in Mathematica?

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg78312] Re: Why use Java in Mathematica?
• From: David Bailey <dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk>
• Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 04:22:35 -0400 (EDT)
• References: <a6e65e8d0706220205m63dc9817id956db71bd8457c3@mail.gmail.com> <f5o7iq$4tk$1@smc.vnet.net> <200706260809.EAA03860@smc.vnet.net> <f5tbk1$21v$1@smc.vnet.net>

Murray Eisenberg wrote:
> Would you still object to paclet delivery of bug fixes if the user had a 
> choice of whether to accept the paclets?  Or at least if the delivery 
> were "noisy" rather than quiet?
> 
> And isn't getting bug fixes quickly often more desirable than waiting 
> for a new, numbered release?
> 
> David Bailey wrote:
>> I would also like to know just how far the packlet concept is intended 
>> to go. For example, if actual code improvements (bug fixes) were to be 
>> delivered in this way, I think it would be a very unfortunate step.
> 
I agree - if bug fixes arrived and were announced and you had the chance 
to accept/reject them, that would be much more acceptable - although 
even then it would create confusion when someone reports a problem with 
Mathematica - were they using 6.01246b?

Come to think of it, upgrades to the documentation could usefully follow 
the same convention - because then you would know there was something 
new to read!

David Bailey
http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk

• References:
  • Re: Why use Java in Mathematica?
    • From: David Bailey <dave@Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk>