Chained-functional notation examples?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg132692] Chained-functional notation examples?
- From: Unknown <dog at gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 02:26:28 -0400 (EDT)
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
- Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@wolfram.com
- Delivered-to: mathgroup-outx@smc.vnet.net
- Delivered-to: mathgroup-newsendx@smc.vnet.net
I came to 'Mathematica' via Xahlee's criticism of the ad-hoc nature of unix-piping [functional notation]. He claims [& I believe him] that Mathematica has a better, more consistent notation. But the facility of PRE, IN & POST-fix alternatives, seems bad. You want ONE way of acieving the goal. More rules just increases mental load. A major benefit of functional [unix-piping] programming style, is that you don't need to remember the-full-journey: you just need to remember the previous stage's output. Nor do you need to remember several names: the previous output is just "it". A superficial read through a recent article[s] here, about <collecting data from several servers, and agregating it, and sending the result to a master> seemed very interesting, and matches my ideas of using functional programming. But I can't afford to invest in ANOTHER notation/syntax, without good prospect of productivety increase. Just as a test, how would Mathematica handle the following [or part of] little task: search all files in Dir=tree D | which are less than N days-old | and which contain string S1 | and which contain string S2 . Actually, this seems not a good example, since it's biased towards the *nix file system's format/syntax. Try: Search in table of ListOfOpenFiles for lineS with path-P [field] | which have same tty-field as line with path-P2 & program-M [field] This sounds like a data-base problem? Or is there a nice list of 'such' Mathematica examples? Thanks, == John Grant.