MathGroup Archive 2008

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

Search the Archive

Re: Re: A Package Function Tutorial

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg92270] Re: [mg92246] Re: [mg92228] A Package Function Tutorial
  • From: "peter lindsay" <pl.0 at>
  • Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 05:32:24 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <>

I've got a lot of sympathy with this comment below; I often think there's a
bit of showing-off amongst coders who make code as arcane as possible. Often
the hardest, and cleverest, thing to do is to write clear maintainable code

2008/9/24 Mauricio Esteban Cuak <cuak2000 at>

> Just a small comment that probably only adresses beginners like me:
> While a function with all the bells and whistles can have a lot of good
> things, I often
> spend too much time trying to figure out how a function works when i
> download a package.
> If it had less of all that nice stuff, I could understand how it works and
> avoid feeding it with the wrong input (instead of not understanding it and
> having the function tell me that it's a wrong input)
> Of course, I am not suggesting people shouldn't write professional looking
> functions; I'm only saying that sometimes there's a trade-off, at least for
> beginners like me that are trying to understand how the functions work.
> cd
> 2008/9/23 <blackhole at>
> > I have written a brief introduction to writing package functions that
> > implement most of the bells and whistles one would associate with a
> > professionally written function.  Some of the topics covered are
> > implementation of Automatic in functions, overloading of built-in
> > symbols, and others.
> >
> > Yes, most of the material can be found scattered in the shipping
> > documentation, but my sense is that there is no good place to find
> > essentially a checklist of the features a good function should have,
> > like argument checking, attributes, syntax coloring, etc.  You will
> > find that I am no expert, but perhaps someone at Wolfram (or
> > elsewhere) will be offended enough to contribute some good
> > suggestions.
> >
> > You can find it at my website,
> >
> > Here you will also find a package I published last month, a NURBS
> > package providing a bridge from parametric curves and surfaces to CAD-
> > friendly IGES format.
> >
> >

  • Prev by Date: Re: hi,friends(8)
  • Next by Date: Re: Truncated GUIKit-MathPanel Output
  • Previous by thread: Re: A Package Function Tutorial
  • Next by thread: Re: A Package Function Tutorial