Re: Assertions in Mathematica?
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg113506] Re: Assertions in Mathematica?
- From: kj <no.email at please.post>
- Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 02:10:07 -0500 (EST)
Thank you all for your comments and suggestions. The Hold* setting was indeed at the root of the problem. Thanks also for the advice to become familiar with Mathematica's evaluation sequence. Regarding the docs, I still think it is Mathematica's worst feature, by far. Given Mathematica's general excellence otherwise, and the fact that the main weaknesses of its documentation have not changed one iota for the ~20 years that I've used Mathematica, I conclude that these weaknesses are absolutely intentional. In other words, more than just objecting to Mathematica's documentation, I object to its long-standing *philosophy* of documentation. This philosophy centers on the imperative to avoid formal specification as much as possible, and cover over this shocking omission with a few laconic examples. I don't know why the makers of Mathematica insist on this form of documentation. Maybe they perceive formal specification as a threat to their intellectual property. Or as a threat to the freedom of their future software development (since documenting a feature thoroughly may be interpreted by outside developers as a commitment to those details in future releases). Or maybe they believe that users of Mathematica are too mentally feeble to read documentation that goes beyond a few brief (and hopefully "*neat*") examples. Or maybe all of the above. Whatever the reason, the fact remains that, when it comes to the *content* of its documentation (as opposed to its presentation), Mathematica is third-rate at best, which is scandalous for software as expensive as it is. Even open-source code like the standard Python or Perl libraries have documentation that, even though it is largely produced by unpaid volunteers, is vastly superior, content-wise, to Mathematica's. Mathematica's documentation is the reason why I never recommend Mathematica to anyone. I just can't do it in good conscience, even though, in many other areas I consider Mathematica the gold standard. Yes, I use Mathematica myself, but that's because I've already "paid the price" of countless frustrating hours of blind trial and error to figure out what the documentation omits and thus reach a minimal level of proficiency with it. IOW for me the worst part is in the past. I'd gladly give up using Mathematica for good in exchange for getting back all that misspent time. ~kj