Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive
-----

MathGroup Archive 2013

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

Search the Archive

Re: Mathematica and Lisp

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg129934] Re: Mathematica and Lisp
  • From: Bill Rowe <readnews at sbcglobal.net>
  • Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 03:04:37 -0500 (EST)
  • Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
  • Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@wolfram.com
  • Delivered-to: mathgroup-newout@smc.vnet.net
  • Delivered-to: mathgroup-newsend@smc.vnet.net

On 2/26/13 at 1:11 AM, fateman at cs.berkeley.edu (Richard Fateman)
wrote:

>And for people without much Mathematica experience, or who are not
>adventuresome and just use the syntax they learned in a math class
>and maybe from Pascal or C,  these things will remain mysterious
>indefinitely.

And? Are you arguing Mathematica should be more accessible?
Easier to learn? Or are you suggesting one should not have to
spend time with Mathematica to be come reasonably proficient?

Consider some one who has some math background and whose
programming experience is Fortran. If they then needed to move
to C or C++, wouldn't pointers be rather mysterious indefinitely
if they didn't spend effort to study C or C++? Why should it be
different for Mathematica?




  • Prev by Date: Re: Logic and Truth Tables with Mathematica?
  • Next by Date: Re: Compiling numerical iterations
  • Previous by thread: Re: Mathematica and Lisp
  • Next by thread: Re: Mathematica and Lisp