Re: Applications and Packages, WRI Strikes Out!
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg131064] Re: Applications and Packages, WRI Strikes Out!
- From: Michael Weyrauch <michael.weyrauch at gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 23:20:08 -0400 (EDT)
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
David, > > I can't imagine why anyone would want to edit their package files in the > workbench, when there is a superb package file editor built right in to > Mathematica! well, one really good reason is the multiple Undo facility in the workbench as well as the interface to a versioning system. And the possibility to produce standard documentation as foreseen by Wolfram. I personally like the code formatting in the workbench. And also I find it extremely convenient to use. So, while I agree that the build-in code editor is very good as well, I still think for larger projects the Workbench is a good tool and easy to use. Certainly, I have to live with some nuisances e.g. that the greek characters appera as \[Alpha] etc., but as far as I am concerned this is not a real problem. I understand that the critisism of David Park points mainly to documentation creation, but that does not justify to call the whole system "ill-designed, neglected and shoddily implemented". I cannot see that. Michael