MathGroup Archive 2010

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

Search the Archive

Re: More /.{I->-1} craziness

  • To: mathgroup at
  • Subject: [mg106349] Re: More /.{I->-1} craziness
  • From: Bill Rowe <readnews at>
  • Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 03:28:36 -0500 (EST)

On 1/8/10 at 4:15 AM, fateman at (Richard Fateman)

>Bill Rowe said ...
>"Again, the choice is either understand this behavior and live with
>it or find different software. There isn't any other productive

>Well, reporting something as a bug and hoping it will be fixed is
>another choice.

Reporting a behavior that works as designed as a bug and hoping
it will be "fixed" seems very unproductive to me. What is there
to "fix" if the program performs as designed?

>And writing a version of the facility that does the
>right thing is another choice. (Any takers?)

It seems to me, the effort to do this for replacement rules and
ensure the result doesn't cause other problems is far greater
than the effort needed to understand the current design and use
it to get your desired result.

>Either of these could be "productive".

This is highly debatable.

>Are Mathematica design decisions sacred or something?

Of course Mathematica design decisions are not sacred. But it is
highly desirable new versions of Mathematica run code written
for earlier versions. Altering design decisions almost certainly
means the new version will not run some code written for earlier
versions. So, altering design decisions is not something that
should be done lightly.

I don't believe the existence of users who have not yet taken
the time to understand the current design is sufficient cause to
change the current design. Nor do I think you have made a strong
enough case to warrant a design change in this case.

But on this second point, I am not the one who needs to be
convinced. It is someone at WRI who could actually implement a
change and their management.

  • Prev by Date: Re: Lists of Equations
  • Next by Date: Re: Symbolic Formula
  • Previous by thread: Re: More /.{I->-1} craziness
  • Next by thread: Re: More /.{I->-1} craziness