Re: Re: HoldForm, TraditionalForm Bug?

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg88794] Re: [mg88743] Re: HoldForm, TraditionalForm Bug?*From*: Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz at mimuw.edu.pl>*Date*: Fri, 16 May 2008 05:35:56 -0400 (EDT)*References*: <g0902t$kou$1@smc.vnet.net> <200805151052.GAA21866@smc.vnet.net>

If one is using the Mathematica for exclusively for typesetting, there is absolutely no need to evaluate anything. In which case what, on earth, is the relevance of this supposed "perfect example"? Perfect example of what? It may be argued that the desire to obtain fully "traditional" output when using Mathematica for computation (evaluation) is a rather ambitious one, perhaps excessively so. But, I am sure very few choose "Output Form" as the default output format. Nevertheless, if that is what you wish you can do so! What stops you? In fact you can even set up the FrontEnd to return all output in InputForm, if that is what you really like. What's wrong with other people being able to make other choices? Does it not strike you as rather arrogant to argue that to satisfy your own personal preferences (or perhaps ignorance) Wolfram should reduce the choices available to other users? For in Mathematica, unlike in most other programs, you do not need to use any of the Front End features you do not like, in fact, you do not need to use the Front End at all. That's something you seem to be completely unable to grasp. I cannot find almost any merit in all your posts on this subject except or one argument that curiously you never choose to make (I wonder why?). The argument is, of course, that people who do not need and do not like any of the new Front End features but do wish to have some of the new features of the Kernel, should not have to pay for the development of the former. This could be easily dealt by making the Mathematica Kernel available separately (at a lower price) and giving users a choice of front ends, including a very cheap (or better free) one, much like that in version 2. (An just by the way, by the way, the solution to the original problem, already posted by several persons: PolynomialForm[HoldForm[x y - x^3 - 1], TraditionalOrder -> False] does not seem dreadfully complicated to me.) I have not been able to Andrzej Kozlowski On 15 May 2008, at 19:52, AES wrote: > In article <g0902t$kou$1 at smc.vnet.net>, > "David Park" <djmpark at comcast.net> wrote: > >> Here is a polynomial. Mathematica rearranges the order of the terms. >> >> x y - x^3 - 1 >> -1 - x^3 + x y >> >> I would like to display the polynomial without rearranging the >> order. So I >> use a HoldForm. <further input snipped> > > Sorry, but given previous posts by both of us, have to say that it > seems > to me you've just provided a perfect example of why even attempting to > devise a software system or syntax in which users are supposed to be > able to use the same input both for evaluating (computing, > calculating) > a mathematical expression, and also for displaying (typesetting) the > expression in a desired fashion, is an inherently bad idea. > > And the first several initial responses to your post have simply > reinforced the claim that it's an inherently bad idea. > > And the particular difficulty that's exemplified by this example is > only > one of multiple reasons why it's a bad idea. > > Bottom line, at least IMHO: Attempting to create a software app > that is > simultaneously a top of the line numerical and symbolic computational > app, and also a top of the line typesetting and publication app, is an > inherently impossible goal, and attempting it ultimately acts to the > detriment of both these functions. >

**References**:**Re: HoldForm, TraditionalForm Bug?***From:*AES <siegman@stanford.edu>