Wolfram Mathematica

12:32 AM

Anyone around uses MMA on Linux?

halirutan

@Rojo Only the usual suspects..

What up?

@halirutan Hehe. Well, I'm starting to explor the linux world. I was wondering to what extent does W ignore the linux version.

Are there several big bugs that just aren't in the others? I recall you told me about sound

halirutan

@Rojo It is acceptable, although the front-end doesn't work as nice as in the two other operating systems.

@halirutan You are just talking about responsiveness, not bugs, right?

Syntax highlighting for example is fine

right?

Because it was misbehaving, but I just installed it. I'll reboot

halirutan

@Rojo There are some issues with Dynamic stuff which seems to crash Mathematica more often, but in general you can work with it.

(you shouldn't try Sound and webcam is not working, but the important stuff works)

12:43 AM

@halirutan Ok, thanks. I hope it remains that way in v10

7 hours later…

Sjoerd C. de Vries

7:48 AM

I was looking at the operator precedence table and it suddenly occurred to me that the grouping order (last column) of Map is wrong, or that my understanding of the notation seems incorrect. It says that two Maps in a series connecting three expressions (i.e. e/@e/@e) group as e/@(e/@e), but instead I believe they group as (e/@e)/@e.

Try, for instance, f/@{g1[#],g2[#]}&/@{1,2,3}

Am I interpreting the third column's notation incorrectly?

@SjoerdC.deVries The Map on the left in your example is enclosed by the pure function. Triple-click on the &.

@SjoerdC.deVries so try:
g = {g1[#], g2[#]} &;
f /@ g /@ {1, 2, 3}

Sjoerd C. de Vries

@Kuba Yeah, I tried parenthesis around {g1[#], g2[#]} & and it did the same

@SjoerdC.deVries I'm using ( ) more than it is necessary to avoid such problems :)

Sjoerd C. de Vries

I started with f /@ ({g1[#], g2[#]} &) /@ {1, 2, 3} // Hold // FullForm

and got

[doesn't paste well]

8:04 AM

4 hours later…

11:42 AM

@Kuba. Your latest poll contribution "The amount of options which has unintuitive default vale is too .... high!" would be more idiomatic in English if you changed to "There are too many options with unintuitive default values."

@m_goldberg I was trying to refer to the famous quote :p

@Kuba. What famous quote might that be?

@m_goldberg famous is not the best word. but quite recognizable lately, funnyasduck.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/…

11:59 AM

@Kuba. I see. In that case, at least use correct, clear English: "The number of options having unintuitive default values is too damn high."

@m_goldberg Already changed :)

@Kuba. Good. I have already up-voted it.

@m_goldberg Thanks and sorry again :)

@Kuba. Nothing you need to apologize for. It's a good contribution. I just wanted you to improve it because I thought get more votes if it were clearer.

Got to go now. Breakfast time.

Wolfram Blog: Rich Interactivity of New ebook, Incredible Numbers, Created with the Wolfram Language

@m_goldberg I sorry for the time you are taking to improve my posts :P (omg. this doesn't look well either, I have to read more in english) :)

3 hours later…

Wolfram Blog

3:24 PM

posted on May 28, 2014 by Wolfram Blog

Touch Press recently announced its newest title, Incredible Numbers, by Ian Stewart. The rich interactive explorations in the ebook were prototyped in the Wolfram Language by Phil Ramsden, who is a Teaching Fellow at Imperial College London and a Mathematica trainer. We asked him to relate his experience here. Ian Stewart’s mathematical imagination is boundless. [...]

6 hours later…

9:42 PM

3 years of building a portfolio consisting mostly of Mathematica code led to a 14% pay decrease upon re-entering the workforce, but I was probably overpaid before anyway.

It's a more rural area too.

1 hour later…

Jacob Akkerboom

10:51 PM

@MichaelHale I guess that means you got a job a WRI. If so, congratulations!

No, the third interview they mentioned never transpired. This is for bank fraud detection at TD Bank. They don't have any branches in Georgia, but I'd heard of them as part of TD Ameritrade.

Jacob Akkerboom

11:15 PM

@MichaelHale well, at least that also sounds interesting :).