MathGroup Archive 2010

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

Search the Archive

Re: A new graphic user interface

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg111774] Re: A new graphic user interface
  • From: "becko" <becko565 at>
  • Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 06:53:43 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <>

Personally, I just love the simplicity of Mathematica interface. Just a 
blank page to write stuff. Nothing more. And all the power is right there. 
Anything more would make it complicated, buggy, or not general-purpose as it 
is. One thing that bothers me though is the limited undo. It turns out that 
this is more tricky with Mathematica than what one might think. It has been 
discussed several times before:

I just hope that when WRI finally decides to to something about this undo 
issue, they don't break the simplicity of the interface as it is today. If 
they don't have some super slick and simple solution to this issue, I would 
prefer that the undo remains as it is. As I said, the simplicity and 
consistency of Mathematica is something I wouldn't risk for anything.

I also like the idea of users contributing to the documentation. 
Particularly the Possible Issues sections.

From: "peter" <plindsay.0 at>
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 4:25 AM
To: <mathgroup at>
Subject: [mg111774] [mg111731] Re: A new graphic user interface

> buggy indeed; "Safari can't find server"
> Thanks anyway
> Peter
> On 11 August 2010 09:45, telefunkenvf14 <rgorka at> wrote:
>> On Aug 10, 2:58 am, peter <plindsa... at> wrote:
>>> Perhaps an enterprising contributor from this forum could start a Wiki
>>> where experts could contribute. Wolfram might allow a link to the Wiki
>>> from within Mathematica ?
>>> Peter Lindsay
>> Good news if all you want is a Wiki.... there already is a one!!!
>> (
>> However, the server has always been slow and buggy when I've tried to
>> access it. Your mileage may vary. (Perhaps we could chip in for a
>> server upgrade?!? Or maybe WRI could host it on their infrastructure?)
>>> On 9 August 2010 10:14, David Bailey <d... at> wrote:
>>> > On 08/08/10 12:21, telefunkenvf14 wrote:
>>> >> 4. While I've also REALLY grown to love the documentation materials
>>> >> (especially compared to other languages!!), I do wish there were a 
>>> >> way
>>> >> WRI could somehow include a way for users to contribute to it and
>>> >> customize it. (i) When a user comes across a documentation example
>>> >> they find confusing, it would be nice if there were small/discrete
>>> >> button that linked to additional explanations provided by the
>>> >> community. This would be a way to document 'gotchas' and points of
>>> >> confusion amongst users---and would surely be useful summary info 
>>> >> that
>>> >> WRI could use to improve the product. (ii) I'd also like to be able 
>>> >> to
>>> >> bookmark locations in the documentation and save scraps of customized
>>> >> code ideas, tagged to those bookmarks. I know this would cut down on
>>> >> the mountain of scrap notebooks I have!!
>>> > This is an excellent idea - I hope WRI are listening!
>>> > For example, people would soon flag the fact that MatrixForm leaves an
>>> > extra layer in expressions like:
>>> > A = Transpose[B]//MatrixForm
>>> > This is not obvious from the documentation.
>>> > Of course, to make this work, WRI would have to vet the extra 
>>> > material,
>>> > or give trusted users the right to add material.
>>> > David Bailey
>>> >

  • Prev by Date: Re: further // Benchmark - 64 bit much slower than 32
  • Next by Date: answer // further // Benchmark - 64 bit much slower than 32 bit
  • Previous by thread: Re: A new graphic user interface
  • Next by thread: Re: A new graphic user interface