> Am 20.10.2010 14:07, schrieb Xah Lee:
> > On Oct 20, 4:52 am, Marc Mientki
> >> Am 20.10.2010 13:14, schrieb Xah Lee:
> >>> See also:
> >>> • 〈The Importance of Terminology's Quality In Computer Languages〉
> >>> http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/naming_functions.html
> >>> where i gave some examples of the naming.
> >> "I'd like to introduce a blog post by Stephen Wolfram, on the design
> >> process of Mathematica. In particular, he touches on the importance of
> >> naming of functions."
> >> "The functions in Mathematica, are usually very well-named, in
> >> contrast to most other computing languages."
> >> "Let me give a few example. [...]"
> > thanks for your post. didn' t know you also use Mathematica.
> Not anymore, unfortunately. New job = no Mathematica. I tried with
> Maxima, but it is considered syntactically Middle Ages. Terribly
> confused (vectors, arrays, matrix, lists, sets - maxima does not know
> the motto of "list for everything").
> >> It is much easier to improve something good than to invent from scratch.
> >> When Lisp was born, Stephen Wolfram was still wearing diapers.
> >> For your information: Mathematica was my first Lisp-like language. I
> >> used it about 10 years almost every day and I love it because of the
> >> beauty of the concept. But Mathematica has two serious problems: first,
> >> there is only one implementation and it is commercial, and secondly,
> >> Mathematica is very, very slowly and does not generate executable code
> >> that can be used without Mathematica itself. Thus, comparisons to other
> >> languages, such as Lisp are not fair.
> > you are right... thought these aspects don't have much to do with
> > function naming.
> Yes. I have it written because I see that you like to call Mathematica
> as a counter-example, in many cases.
> > i tend to think that Mathematica is that way due to a unique mind,
> > Stephen Wolfram. And if i may say, i share much mindset with him with
> > respect to many lang design issues.
> Yes, me too, alone but for performance reasons, Mathematica in the area
> where I work (image processing) is not suitable. I mean - not research
> or rapid prototyping, but industrial image processing.
> > (or rather, Mathematica was my
> > first lang for about 6 years too)
> Mathematica = first language at all? No FORTRAN/BASIC/Pascal/C?
yeah. actually the first lang is HP-28s calculator.
• 〈HP-28S Advanced Scientific Calculator〉
• 〈Xah Lee's Computing Experience Bio〉
in short summary, counting only real serious involvement, say, few hours a day:
• 1991 to 1994, HP-28s.
• ~1992 to 1998. Mathematica
• 1996 to now. html (and later years related css, xml )
• 1998 to 2004. Perl, sql, apache, bash, whole unix admin shebang.
• 2001, 2005. Java.
• 2005 to 2006 Python.
• 2006 to now. emacs lisp.
what's your experiences?
Xah ∑ http://xahlee.org/ ☄