Wolfram Mathematica

12:25 AM

quick question: I remember reading a question about some kind of Tagging for Graphics that allows you to e.g. connect corners of two primitives, no matter how they were transformed - and I can't seem to find it. Can anybody point me in the right direction, or am I just imagining things?

Kuba

5:37 AM

@Mathe172 mathematica.stackexchange.com/q/155237/5478?

Mathe172

9:43 AM

@Kuba That's the one - thanks a lot!

gwr

9:53 PM

Maybe this should be a discussion to be had on Meta: Nasser had posted about a rather long list of integrals that Mathematica 11.3 would not integrate symbolically while Mathematica 11.2 had. After lots of close votes and voices of "rather file a bug report" this post eventually got deleted. I am asking myself: Is that a good thing?

Why must a user of M.SE be "protected" from seeing something like the issue Nasser had reported? After all, either 11.2 had given wrong integration results, or 11.3 has lost capabilities its predecessor clearly had?

Personally I find being informed about such kind of "changes" rather interesting and good to know. After all, this community is rather fair about assigning "bug" tags and informing about their resolution. Not making such things transparent to me looks like too much self-censorship?

To this user, reading about "better filing a bug report than posting" coming from wRI employees also participating in this SE has the unfortunate odor of "vested interest". We should maybe be careful here? I am clearly prepared to air this on Meta given sufficient interest...

Personally I do find it important -- and legitimite -- to build up some kind of pressure to have issues fixed and resolved by making them transparent and searchable in public places like this one. Being forced to only write CaseReports as single individuals dilutes our market power as consumers of a still quite expensive (and ingenious!) piece of software. It may be in everybody's good interest to err on the right side here with regard to bug-transparency-self-censorship?

2

ilian

11:12 PM

@gwr I find the "unfortunate odor" comment a little offensive. People are welcome to scrutinize my activity on this site for the last 6 years as they see fit, but sorry, there are no hidden agendas or axes to grind.

2

halirutan

11:32 PM

@ilian It's a valid question: Would WRI employees suggest do close a question and rather file a bug to get the information from the public? In my opinion, the answer is clearly no.

This just wouldn't work. I find it a bit funny, that @gwr get's this impression at all. In other communities, like Jetbrains, we have the same situation. We discuss things that don't work in the community. But, the big difference here is that it is almost an honor if a Jetbrains employee suggests filing a report because it means you have found a real bug.

And why is that? Because bugs are openly visible for everyone in the bugtracker, while WRI bugs vanish in the internal database and no-one knows about it.

3

halirutan

11:57 PM

This is why we have this ridiculous double tracking of bugs that are reported by users: We keep (and try to update their status) here on SE and we report them to WRI. I share this option of @gwr to full extend

2 hours ago, by gwr

Personally I do find it important -- and legitimite -- to build up some kind of pressure to have issues fixed and resolved by making them transparent and searchable in public places like this one. Being forced to only write CaseReports as single individuals dilutes our market power as consumers of a still quite expensive (and ingenious!) piece of software. It may be in everybody's good interest to err on the right side here with regard to bug-transparency-self-censorship?

Transcript for