[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: evaluate to True?
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg125948] Re: evaluate to True?
*From*: A Retey <awnl at gmx-topmail.de>
*Date*: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 05:32:34 -0400 (EDT)
*Delivered-to*: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
*References*: <201204061001.GAA23045@smc.vnet.net> <CAEtRDSfexgBvoLTpXVPv=6B7m_CsNwqhUAWQBvnj4JMimsN-Sg@mail.gmail.com> <jlp3c2$17v$1@smc.vnet.net>
Hi,
> The misinterpretation of the function due to the name can be the cause
> of severe bugs as seen
> in message . Maybe a name like MatchQ would be more
> appropriate for future versions
> of Mathematica.
MatchQ already exists and does something slightly different. And MemberQ
has been existing for many versions and probably will never be changed
-- too much existing code would be broken.
I don't think that the name is problematic at all as there are many
functions in Mathematica that use patterns in a similar way (e.g.
Position, Cases, Collect...), so it doesn't really come as a surprise
that MemberQ behaves as it does. By using patterns these functions
become a lot more powerful so many users wouldn't see such a limitation
as an advantage...
albert
Prev by Date:
**Re: Varying a constant in an ODE to Manipulate solution**
Next by Date:
**Re: Bug in pattern test, or I did something wrong?**
Previous by thread:
**Re: evaluate to True?**
Next by thread:
**Re: evaluate to True?**
| |