4 ms·
I’ve tried to appreciate SymPy but I always find myself running home to Mathematica. There’s simply no comparison. SymPy is like a match and Mathematica has the
by qubex 3y ago
I’ve tried to appreciate SymPy but I always find myself running home to Mathematica. There’s simply no comparison. SymPy is like a match and Mathematica has the power of a sizeable thermonuclear warhead.
- rowanG077 3y agoIt's true. Unfortunately Mathematica simply can't be used in many domains. I would really like to integrate mathematica with a type checker for automatic theorem proving. I think it could greatly alleviate the clunkiness of dependent types.
- sheepshear 3y agoWhat's preventing it from being used?
- rowanG077 3y agoI can hardly accept a cool $3230 per year license. I didn't even attempt to go this route. I doubt they would even allow it tbh. The site isn't exactly clear on that.
- sheepshear 3y agoI thought you meant "domain" like a field of work or study.
- rowanG077 3y agoYes type checkers are a domain of study. Basically any domain where mathematica needs to integrated into the end result as is.
- sheepshear 3y agoImplying there's a technical reason it couldn't be used.
- rowanG077 3y agoI wasn't implying there is a technical reason, I definitely didn't mean it that way. If Mathematica were open sourced tomorrow nothing would stand in the way of trying it out. If a company simply blocks you from using their tech that definitely means you can't use it. For example. I can't run my own entertainment system on a Tesla car. There is no technical reason it's not possible. Tesla simply disallows it.
- sheepshear 3y agoI get it I'm just surprised that's what you meant.
- nequo 3y agoDo you know of attempts to integrate SymPy in this way?
- rowanG077 3y agoI tried it with symengine as a GHC(Haskell) Type checker plugin. But it was just too limited to be worthwhile.