4 ms·

> The high level functions, while nice for demos, never quite do what you need. Want to display data vs. time with errorbars around the data? Sorry, no function

> The high level functions, while nice for demos, never quite do what you need. Want to display data vs. time with errorbars around the data? Sorry, no function for this completely exotic use case, please hack a DateListPlot on top of an ErrorListPlot [1]. 'Never' seems like quite a generalization. What about e.g. Classify and Predict, or FormFunction, or Interpreter, or Nearest? Do those all not do quite what you need? Conversely, does other software do better, on average, in 'doing what one wants'? Which software? There are gaps, definitely, one small example you've pointed out. My pet peeve, for example, is that it is unnecessarily difficult to map colors and sizes onto graph vertices based on vertex properties, which I needed to do for [1]. Still, the scope of visualization functionality is so vast [4] that it's not surprising there are gaps (which we continue to plug, the whole language is a never ending project). And having users report to us what they want lets us prioritize those things. Anyway, clearly DateListPlot should learn about error bars, and I'm sure in a year or two it will. Although it is frustrating you can't just go in there and tweak the source code yourself, I agree. > Don't get me started on the KelvinsDifference vs. Kelvins thing, which are both represented by the same symbol to maximize your confusion when your unit conversions are failing... I think Quantities should probably gain a little box, like DateObjects have [2], that lets you mouse-over for more information, which should make this problem easier to diagnose. But the distinction is apparently important [3], although I don't want to "get you started" :-). Either way, Alpha shouldn't change its interpretation from under you, that's definitely a bug. > http://mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/65600 http://mathematica.stackexchange.com/questions/65600 Unfortunate, but fixed within a day of being reported! 10.0.2 has passed many weeks of SQA and will ship shortly. So at least this bug will only have been around for 0.0.2 versions :-) [1] http://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2013/04/data-science-of-the-facebook-world/ http://blog.stephenwolfram.com/2013/04/data-science-of-the-f... [2] http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/DateObject.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/DateObject.html, http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/Entity.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/Entity.html [3] http://reference.wolfram.com/language/tutorial/TemperatureUnits.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/tutorial/TemperatureUn... [4] http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/DataVisualization.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/DataVisualizatio..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/FunctionVisualization.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/FunctionVisualiz..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/ChartingAndInformationVisualization.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/ChartingAndInfor..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/MapsAndCartography.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/MapsAndCartograp..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/DynamicVisualization.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/DynamicVisualiza..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/GraphicsOptionsAndStyling.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/GraphicsOptionsA..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/GraphicsInteractivityAndDrawing.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/GraphicsInteract..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/SymbolicGraphicsLanguage.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/SymbolicGraphics..., http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/ImportingAndExporting.html http://reference.wolfram.com/language/guide/ImportingAndExpo...

maho 12y ago
> 'Never' seems like quite a generalization. What about e.g. Classify and Predict, or FormFunction, or Interpreter, or Nearest? Do those all not do quite what you need? Certainly, there are many functions that do what I need - but in my experience, the "higher" the level of the function is, the smaller the chances that it fullfills my needs. > Conversely, does other software do better, on average, in 'doing what one wants'? Which software? Over the years I have come to appreciate Matlab. Like Mathematica, it also has some maddening idiosyncrasies [0] and is mostly closed source, but it let's me inspect its high level functions. For instance, if I am not happy about the errorbar plots, I can execute the command "edit errorbar" to get an idea what I have to change. If the change is complex, Matlab is a decent enough IDE to implement it anyways. In comparison, Mathematica seems like a front-end to the kernel to me. It is not a proper IDE. I heard there is a Mathematica IDE called Wolfram Workbench [1], but it costs extra. For me, my biggest problem is not about the sofware "doing what one wants", but that it is doing things I don't want. File corruption and sign error bugs are absolutely not ok for software that I base my publications on, and I have not encountered them in the alternatives [2]. Mathematica is a powerful piece of software and has many use cases. Of course it can't be a "eierlegende Wollmilchsau" that is good at everything [3]. But personally (disgruntled customer rambling here) I wonder why Wolfram Research is devoting so much energy into developing all these new, shiny features while the foundation is crumbling. [0] Try running a Matlab script that has - gasp - a space in its name. It will fail and produce an "undefined function" error message. (Not very helpful to new users.) The newer versions at least warn you if you try to save a script with an illegal name - but they still allow you to run it and produce the non-descript error message. [1] http://www.wolfram.com/products/workbench/ http://www.wolfram.com/products/workbench/ [2] The alternatives I actually use are Igor Pro, Matlab, and Excel. Excel can easily lead to sign errors because of the unexpected behaviour of the unary minus. It takes precedence over the power operator, so if you evaluate "-1^2", the result is +1. While you can get used to that behaviour, you can easily forget it when you work with references. Say A1 contains 1, then "-A1^2" evaluates to +1. If, like me, you prefer working with named cells and name A1 as x, then "-x^2" also evaluates to +1. I once botched an analysis due to this behaviour. Ironically, this was one of the reasons why I wanted to base my current analysis on Mathematica. [3] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wollmilchsau.png?uselang=de http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wollmilchsau.png?usel...

maho 12y ago

> 'Never' seems like quite a generalization. What about e.g. Classify and Predict, or FormFunction, or Interpreter, or Nearest? Do those all not do quite what you need? Certainly, there are many functions that do what I need - but in my experience, the "higher" the level of the function is, the smaller the chances that it fullfills my needs. > Conversely, does other software do better, on average, in 'doing what one wants'? Which software? Over the years I have come to appreciate Matlab. Like Mathematica, it also has some maddening idiosyncrasies [0] and is mostly closed source, but it let's me inspect its high level functions. For instance, if I am not happy about the errorbar plots, I can execute the command "edit errorbar" to get an idea what I have to change. If the change is complex, Matlab is a decent enough IDE to implement it anyways. In comparison, Mathematica seems like a front-end to the kernel to me. It is not a proper IDE. I heard there is a Mathematica IDE called Wolfram Workbench [1], but it costs extra. For me, my biggest problem is not about the sofware "doing what one wants", but that it is doing things I don't want. File corruption and sign error bugs are absolutely not ok for software that I base my publications on, and I have not encountered them in the alternatives [2]. Mathematica is a powerful piece of software and has many use cases. Of course it can't be a "eierlegende Wollmilchsau" that is good at everything [3]. But personally (disgruntled customer rambling here) I wonder why Wolfram Research is devoting so much energy into developing all these new, shiny features while the foundation is crumbling. [0] Try running a Matlab script that has - gasp - a space in its name. It will fail and produce an "undefined function" error message. (Not very helpful to new users.) The newer versions at least warn you if you try to save a script with an illegal name - but they still allow you to run it and produce the non-descript error message. [1] http://www.wolfram.com/products/workbench/ http://www.wolfram.com/products/workbench/ [2] The alternatives I actually use are Igor Pro, Matlab, and Excel. Excel can easily lead to sign errors because of the unexpected behaviour of the unary minus. It takes precedence over the power operator, so if you evaluate "-1^2", the result is +1. While you can get used to that behaviour, you can easily forget it when you work with references. Say A1 contains 1, then "-A1^2" evaluates to +1. If, like me, you prefer working with named cells and name A1 as x, then "-x^2" also evaluates to +1. I once botched an analysis due to this behaviour. Ironically, this was one of the reasons why I wanted to base my current analysis on Mathematica. [3] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wollmilchsau.png?uselang=de http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wollmilchsau.png?usel...