Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive
-----

MathGroup Archive 2012

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

Search the Archive

Re: Can't use subscripted variables in function definition?

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg124119] Re: Can't use subscripted variables in function definition?
  • From: Ralph Dratman <ralph.dratman at gmail.com>
  • Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 05:55:51 -0500 (EST)
  • Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
  • References: <jebngu$1bb$1@smc.vnet.net>

Is this just a discussion about how things look on the screen -- or is
there some deeper difference between Mathematica's "array" indices and
properly-implemented subscripts?

Ralph

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Armand Tamzarian
<mike.honeychurch at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 8, 8:26 pm, Bill Rowe <readn... at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 1/7/12 at 5:25 AM, c... at comcast.net (Chris Young) wrote:
>>
>> >What is the status of subscripted variables in Mathematica now?
>>
>> It has not changed in version 8.
>>
>> >Can't they finally be used as regular variables?
>>
>> Yes, but not by default. You can use subscripted variables like
>> ordinary variables using the Notation package. However, from my
>> perspective this is more effort than it is worth.
>>
>> >Or is there some workaround so that they can be? This is time-honored,
>> >very intuitive mathematical notation that should be available, IMO.
>>
>> Yes, it would be useful to have subscripted variables fully
>> integrated into Mathematica. And, that may well happen in some
>> future version. But for now, it seems to me this is simply one
>> of the limitations Mathematica has.
>
>
> I recently ported 90 pages of code from a competitor product -- mainly
> used by engineers -- to Mathematica for someone. The code was heavily
> subscripted because subscripted variables in the competitor product
> were pretty easy and essentially worked out of the box the way you
> would expect without a learning curve or any other issues. The were
> other reasons to justify the port to Mathematica but it was quite enlightening
> to see code in which subscripted symbolic variables were so natural
> and frankly made me wonder why Mathematica is behind the curve on this. Lets
> hope V9 offers this.
>
> Mike
>
>



  • Prev by Date: Re: Mantaining the same form
  • Next by Date: Re: more plotting peculiarities
  • Previous by thread: Re: Can't use subscripted variables in function definition?
  • Next by thread: Re: Can't use subscripted variables in function definition?