4 ms·
> Generally I prefer small, simple languages. I would argue that MMA is a small language hiding behind a gigantic, domain-specific library.
by pmiller2 10y ago
> Generally I prefer small, simple languages.
I would argue that MMA is a small language hiding behind a gigantic, domain-specific library.
- acangiano 10y agoYes. Wolfram is a small language, with the world's largest standard library.
- quantumhobbit 10y agoIt helps that the huge library has some of the best documentation I've ever encountered.
- backslash_16 10y agoIf a massive standard library, or really any library, doesn't have good documentation how do you find out about it? In some statically typed languages like C# and Java you can use an IDE's object or interface explorer to see what the classes, methods, and properties of a class lib are. If that's missing do you have to use introspection or reflection? In a REPL if the language has one? Is it assumed a compiled language will be statically typed (though that doesn't have to be true) and if it's not the source code will come with any library so examining it is easy?
- phreeza 10y agoThe thing is, the entire standard library is in the default namespace. I personally dislike that, but then again, I was raised on python.
- cschmidt 10y agoFor those that haven't used Mma, the uppercase/lowercase convention helps a lot here. Built in functions start with uppercase letters, like LinearProgramming. You should name your functions with a lowercase letter. So the namespace is messy, but you're never going to accidentally collide with a built in name.