Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic systems
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg92495] Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic systems
- From: Sebastian Meznaric <meznaric at gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 18:35:02 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Sep 30, 1:33 pm, Paolo Bientinesi <pau... at aices.rwth-aachen.de> wrote: > Hi everybody, > > As part of a presentation to students, I will have to support the > claim that "Mathematica is better than other systems when it comes to > symbolic computations". Some experts in other systems will be > giving a 15 min presentation to convince the audience of the contrary, > and then it will be my turn. > > At this point I am quite clueless on how to make my point across. > First of all, I am not at all familiar with any other system's > symbolic toolboxes, so I don't know what are the weaknesses. Also, I > am not sure what kind of demo could really make an impression on > graduate students and colleagues. > > Has any of you any experience on this? Ideas? Suggestions? > > Thank you! > -- > Prof. Paolo Bientinesi, Ph.D. > RWTH Aachen University, AICES > pau... at aices.rwth-aachen.de > pau... at alumni.cs.utexas.edu Hi Paolo If I were you I would highlight the pattern recognition capabilities and the advantages of functional programming. Other symbolic systems are usually more similar to conventional programming languages. So you can say that Mathematica has unique abilities that others do not have :) But in the end it usually comes down to taste.