3 ms·
I did know that a lot of Wolfram|Alpha (And Mathematica itself too, right?) is written in Mathematica code, but as mumrah points out, that only proves that it w
by jrajav 14y ago
I did know that a lot of Wolfram|Alpha (And Mathematica itself too, right?) is written in Mathematica code, but as mumrah points out, that only proves that it works well in production as a DSL. When I said "Ruby, C++, or Clojure," I was trying to evoke more common tasks like a desktop application, a simple server, a text-processing library, etc.
Edit: Even if Mathematica isn't technically a DSL, it certainly seems to be geared heavily towards symbolic mathematics and data processing/visualization. My question is really, how does it fare outside its element?
- carlob 14y agoYes, some parts of Mathematica are written in Mathematica, though most fast build in functions (linear algebra is one example that comes to mind) are written in faster, compiled languages. As I said in response to mumrah, Mathematica is not a DSL. You might argue that a lot of 'library' counts as language in Mathematica, but not that you can't write general purpose applications.
- Locke1689 14y agoMathematica is certainly a domain-specific language. Its domain is symbolic mathematics. You may be unfamiliar with the term "DSL." It refers to a language designed for solving a specific computational task. This was, in fact, the stated goal of Mathematica. DSL does not mean the language cannot solve other tasks, only that it was meant for solving a specific one.
- tokipin 14y agoi don't think it's a DSL. its evaluation paradigm is symbolic in the same way you would say Java's paradigm is OOP, yet we wouldn't say Java is an OOP DSL even if that's true in some technical sense in this respect i think the name "Mathematica" does a disservice to the system. originally it may have been intended for math, but in its current form it's more like a general prototyping/presentation/construction system that makes thorough use of its capacity as a research platform