Re: Wolfram Workbench user experiences
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg89120] Re: Wolfram Workbench user experiences
- From: Will Robertson <wspr81 at gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 01:31:02 -0400 (EDT)
- References: <fvegvm$5f6$1@smc.vnet.net> <fvpcun$mlo$1@smc.vnet.net> <g134h2$m2m$1@smc.vnet.net> <g15qr8$pff$1@smc.vnet.net> <g18hsh$kjp$1@smc.vnet.net>
On 2008-05-24 17:29:13 +0930, David Bailey <dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk> said: > Which symbols are you referring to - all my symbols display correctly > after save and re-load - things lie \[alpha] \[Breve], etc. Hmm, I seem to have got my wires crossed after an initially confusing experience. The symbols you mention are displayed correctly (is there any chance this changed after 6.0.0?) although more complex expressions like Subscript[a,1] are decomposed into their fulltext forms. Also, perhaps more relevantly, symbols like -> and :> are decomposed after save/reopen, even though they are *automatically* transformed into their nicer single-glyph equivalents. > I guess indenting would be a useful option, but everyone has a different > preferred style for indentation. I'd be happy using the Mathematica defaults :) > I use a small indentation program of my > own that indents Mathematica code in my preferred way, and therefore I > don't want the editor to change this. Is this code public? Anything that makes indenting more pleasant is a big plus for me! *** I forgot to mention my other gripe with the m-file editor :) The lack of nice symbol spacing! It's crazy that Mathematica has all that code for nicely displaying Mathematica code...and then does use it in the m-file editor. I spend way too long adjusting whitespace for readability when transferring code between notebooks and packages. Will