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

Re: Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg92567] Re: [mg92564] Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic
• From: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
• Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 04:12:47 -0400 (EDT)
• Organization: Mathematics & Statistics, Univ. of Mass./Amherst
• References: <gc7fsf$eo7$1@smc.vnet.net> <200810051006.GAA11523@smc.vnet.net>
• Reply-to: murray at math.umass.edu

And "remember how to use it between infrequent uses" is a good criterion 
to note when comparing the long-to-type Mathematica names of functions, 
on the one hand, and the terse but often cryptic names of functions in 
some other systems.

AES wrote:
> 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) ?!?!?!?
> 

-- 
Murray Eisenberg                     murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower      phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts                413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street            fax   413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305

• References:
  • Re: Comparison between Mathematica and other symbolic systems
    • From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>