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

Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic systems

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg92564] Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic systems
• From: AES <siegman at stanford.edu>
• Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 06:06:44 -0400 (EDT)
• Organization: Stanford University
• References: <gc7fsf$eo7$1@smc.vnet.net>

In article <gc7fsf$eo7$1 at smc.vnet.net>,
 Bill Rowe <readnews at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On 10/3/08 at 6:41 AM, awnl at gmx-topmail.de (Albert Retey) wrote:
> 
> >When choosing a system, I think one needs to answer these questions:
> 
> >1) can the system solve the problem at hand
> >2) how much effort is it to feed the problem to the system
> >3) how efficient is the system in calculating the solution
> 
> Which really says 2) is the most important consideration. But I
> would expand 2) to be the amount of time to input the problem
> *and* verify the input has been done correctly. In my
> experience, the time to verify/debug input is by far where most
> of the effort is spent.

No mention at all of "how easy it is to learn to use the system" (and 
remember how to use it between infrequent uses) ?!?!?!?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic
    • From: Murray Eisenberg <murray@math.umass.edu>