Re: Function Option Names
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg118254] Re: Function Option Names
- From: "Sjoerd C. de Vries" <sjoerd.c.devries at gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 19:16:30 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <ioekde$n2p$1@smc.vnet.net>
My feeling is that this is to prevent filling up namespace too quickly. The more symbols get into the system namespace the slower it will get (though I think the difference will be marginal). One of the disadvantages of using strings is no spellchecking and no name completion (ctrl-k). Cheers Sjoerd More Mathematica questions answered at: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/mathematica On Apr 17, 1:54 pm, mmausr <opn... at gmail.com> wrote: > I'm curious why some option names are strings (e.g. options to the > FinancialDerivative function), while other option names are symbols > (e.g. options to the ListPlot function). > > More generally, why are some parameters of built-in functions > specified as strings and others specified as symbols that evaluate to > themselves?