4 ms·
You're nitpicking, and you do need to "read the docs", or at least understand the language. Wolfram language is Lisp-like, and is fully symbolic. This allows so
by esjeon 8y ago
You're nitpicking, and you do need to "read the docs", or at least understand the language. Wolfram language is Lisp-like, and is fully symbolic. This allows some definitive programming, and Mathematica does take advantage of this.
Graphics in Mathematica is symbolic (according to the documentation). You can think of it as a Lisp-based vector graphics. It's still possible to manipulate pixel data extracted w/ "ImageData". It's just that "Image" object never allows direct pixel manipulation, which is the same in some other frameworks.
Also, "Style" is a function, not a block, that attaches styling information to its first argument. "Text" is a graphics primitive that provides placing information for text inside "Graphic". "GeoGraphic" is not neccessary here, and you can load map images with "GeoImage", and "Inset" them into graphics object. "GeoGraphics" is only good for rendering map-related data, like country borders, regions, roads, names, etc.
Wolfram language has its own patterns, and is pretty solid. Personally, I like it because it fully abuses its Lisp-like design, yet everything is curated by one single sane entity. I just dont want to endure a bunch of pretty hax0rs who never stop coming up with half-baked in-house solutions.