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

Re: Mathematica bug??

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg100589] Re: Mathematica bug??
• From: magma <maderri2 at gmail.com>
• Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 06:18:01 -0400 (EDT)
• References: <200906070902.FAA28100@smc.vnet.net> <h0i8cl$j6t$1@smc.vnet.net>

On Jun 8, 6:42 am, Murray Eisenberg <mur... at math.umass.edu> wrote:
> First, you should be very cautious about categorically, and so
> dramatically, entitling a post as "Mathematica bug".
>
> Second, such a title is so general as to be unhelpful to potential reader=
s.


Wow!
oshaughn - a relatively Mathfroup newcomer (just 5 posts so far) -
cries "Bug!" and he gets 14 (self?) reassuring replies within a few
hours, mostly from Mathgroup oldtimers.
Looks like everybody is "on hedge" here :-)
Relax, Mathematica 7.x certainly has bugs, but they probably are not so
obvious anymore and probably only concern the newest functions.
(my grand father was a great lawyer and taught me that if you sprinkle
your sentences with "probably", you never get in trouble. Well...you
- probably - never get into trouble :-)

I certainly share Murray's wise opinions expressed above.
Perhaps I would have expressed them more, shall we say, colorfully :-)

Your apologies are very appreciated.

oshaughn: if you think that "form" matters (differentiable or
otherwise) and you enjoy admiring event horizons from a safe
Mathematica shore, I would suggest you look into David Park's
Tensorial package
at
http://home.comcast.net/~djmpark/TensorialPage.html
Put your XX century antique code to a deserved rest and enjoy:
early XXI century Mathematica code
V.6 compatible
2D output
and....
first class support directly from David.

(OOPS...just slipped into my "marketing mode" again. I must have been
exposed to too much WRI product descriptions lately :-) )
Anyway, check it out. It's well worth its reasonable price.

• References:
  • Mathematica bug??
    • From: oshaughn <oshaughn@gravity.psu.edu>