Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive
-----

MathGroup Archive 2008

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

Search the Archive

RE: Wolfram Workbench user experiences

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg88482] RE: [mg88339] Wolfram Workbench user experiences
  • From: "Jose Luis Gomez" <jose.luis.gomez at itesm.mx>
  • Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 06:42:33 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <200805020743.DAA05430@smc.vnet.net>

Dear David

Before Workbench existed, many times I used a very simple ASCII editor
(Notepad for Windows) to create Mathematica packages. My personal reason for
using an ASCII editor is that I like to have control on the exact code that
is actually written, and I liked to have my code in a readable way, even if
you do Not have Mathematica (if you used Mathematica 5.2 as your IDE, to
write the packages, then .m file was not so easy to read, end-of-line
characters were missing, weird characters would appear, etc. so that you
actually needed the original .nb file from which the .m file was created, in
order to be able to read -as a human- the package)

That is my personal way of programming. Sometimes I do the same with HTML
files, just use a simple ASCII editor, so I have all the control in the
actual code.

Now that I have Wolfram Workbench 1.0.0, I like it very much. For me, it is
like a simple ASCII editor but it does know about Mathematica syntax, so I
have syntax coloring, when I mouse-over a known Mathematica command, I get
the message about the basic syntax of that command, etc. But at the same
time, "WHAT I WRITE IS WHAT I GET" in the final .m file, which is something
that I like very much. Furthermore, you also get syntax coloring when you
print your program. That I love: many advantages without losing the control
of the exact code that is written in the .m file of my packages.

Therefore, for me, who used to program in simple ASCII editor (Notepad for
Windows), the Workbench has been great.

Of course I do a very basic use of all the possibilities of Workbench, so
far I have Not written a package where different programming languages are
used, neither have I used other "advanced" features of Workbench. I have
written just plain Mathematica packages, like the one here:
http://homepage.cem.itesm.mx/lgomez/quantum/index.htm 

Best regards!
Jose 
Mexico


-----Mensaje original-----
De: David Bailey [mailto:dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk] 
Enviado el: Viernes, 02 de Mayo de 2008 02:43 a.m.
Para: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
Asunto: [mg88339] Wolfram Workbench user experiences

I would be very interested in other people's experiences with the 
Wolfram Workbench. I must admit that I prefer to use the frontend as my 
'IDE', and the workbench seemed fairly alien when I tried it.

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




  • Prev by Date: Re: root of complex function
  • Next by Date: Request for Collective Wisdom...
  • Previous by thread: Re: Wolfram Workbench user experiences
  • Next by thread: Re: Wolfram Workbench user experiences