A new graphic user interface
in [Mathematica]
|
From: peter on 12 Aug 2010 05:25 buggy indeed; "Safari can't find server" Thanks anyway Peter On 11 August 2010 09:45, telefunkenvf14 <rgorka(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 10, 2:58 am, peter <plindsa...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Perhaps an enterprising contributor from this forum could start a Wiki >> where experts could contribute. Wolfram might allow a link to the Wiki >> from within Mathematica ? >> >> Peter Lindsay > > Good news if all you want is a Wiki.... there already is a one!!! > (mathematica-users.org) > > However, the server has always been slow and buggy when I've tried to > access it. Your mileage may vary. (Perhaps we could chip in for a > server upgrade?!? Or maybe WRI could host it on their infrastructure?) > >> On 9 August 2010 10:14, David Bailey <d...(a)removedbailey.co.uk> wrote: >> >> > On 08/08/10 12:21, telefunkenvf14 wrote: >> >> >> 4. While I've also REALLY grown to love the documentation materials >> >> (especially compared to other languages!!), I do wish there were a way >> >> WRI could somehow include a way for users to contribute to it and >> >> customize it. (i) When a user comes across a documentation example >> >> they find confusing, it would be nice if there were small/discrete >> >> button that linked to additional explanations provided by the >> >> community. This would be a way to document 'gotchas' and points of >> >> confusion amongst users---and would surely be useful summary info that >> >> WRI could use to improve the product. (ii) I'd also like to be able to >> >> bookmark locations in the documentation and save scraps of customized >> >> code ideas, tagged to those bookmarks. I know this would cut down on >> >> the mountain of scrap notebooks I have!! >> >> > This is an excellent idea - I hope WRI are listening! >> >> > For example, people would soon flag the fact that MatrixForm leaves an >> > extra layer in expressions like: >> >> > A = Transpose[B]//MatrixForm >> >> > This is not obvious from the documentation. >> >> > Of course, to make this work, WRI would have to vet the extra material, >> > or give trusted users the right to add material. >> >> > David Bailey >> >> >http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk > > >
From: Helen Read on 12 Aug 2010 05:26 On 8/11/2010 4:45 AM, telefunkenvf14 wrote: > On Aug 9, 4:16 am, Murray Eisenberg<mur...(a)math.umass.edu> wrote: >> Comments interspersed below. >> >> On 8/8/2010 7:22 AM, telefunkenvf14 wrote: >> >>> One related example, which I believe emphasizes my point: When >>> students jump into using palettes they're able to create a pile of poo >>> rather quickly----a pile they cannot possibly debug due to the fact >>> they've never absorbed 'everything is an expression'. Clinging to the >>> pointy-clicky route also makes the documentation seem very foreign to >>> new users. I have nothing against using palettes, but things need to >>> be learned in proper order.... >> >> I held that position, too. But Helen Read's reports in this group >> provide empirical evidence that this is an unfounded concern: with the >> Classroom Assistant palette, what begins as point-and-click soon morphs >> into just typing input, apparently without much or any intervention by >> the instructor to suggest this change. >> > > Not convinced. I sense this observation is (in part) shaped by the > topic of the class. It absolutely depends on what you are teaching. In calculus, I start them off with the palettes, and let the students wean themselves from the palettes at their own pace. It happens naturally, because everyone eventually picks up the syntax as they go, and they all get sick of point-and-click. > If you're teaching a pure math class? Then sure, I can see how > starting with palettes would do no serious harm---but it all depends > on the skill-set you want students achieve by the end of the semester, > and the types of applications you show/build in class. (Simple problem > solving Simple problem solving is a good place to start. > vs. building more complicated models and interfaces, grabbing > data from the net, automating emails or SMS messages, etc.) When I teach our transition-to-higher-math course (which includes proof writing etc. in the context of some topics in discrete math), I have the students write Mathematica programs for things like encryption. They aren't using palettes for any of it, and the existence of the palettes is neither a hindrance nor a help -- we simply don't use them. I do find, though, that students who came from my calculus class into this course pick up the Mathematica faster than those who did little or no Mathematica in their calculus classes. -- Helen Read University of Vermont
From: David Park on 12 Aug 2010 05:27 As many people know, my paradigm for Mathematica is that it is a piece of paper on which we write our mathematical and technical ideas. True, a rather remarkable piece of paper with memory and active and dynamic capabilities, but a development and writing medium none the less. It is not something that can be learned in a day or a few weeks, anymore than we learned good composition or writing techniques in a few weeks. We practiced it for many years! It is even more difficult with technical writing and Mathematica because of the additional significant complications of the medium and the material. It would be nice if many more students had early exposure and practice with Mathematica so that when they got to college it could be assumed they knew it, and they could spend much more of their time thinking about the subject matter and much less thinking about Mathematica. I know that there are a number of good teachers who say that their students do just fine with a short Mathematica introduction, but I am skeptical that the students get anywhere near the benefit from Mathematica they might obtain with early training. If they are flummoxed by % and %% or postfix // or Map and things like that, they are not literate in the medium. There are many barriers and obstacles to bringing about a more ideal situation, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be a practical educational goal. David Park djmpark(a)comcast.net http://home.comcast.net/~djmpark/ From: telefunkenvf14 [mailto:rgorka(a)gmail.com] > I held that position, too. But Helen Read's reports in this group > provide empirical evidence that this is an unfounded concern: with the > Classroom Assistant palette, what begins as point-and-click soon morphs > into just typing input, apparently without much or any intervention by > the instructor to suggest this change. > Not convinced. I sense this observation is (in part) shaped by the topic of the class. If you're teaching a pure math class? Then sure, I can see how starting with palettes would do no serious harm---but it all depends on the skill-set you want students achieve by the end of the semester, and the types of applications you show/build in class. (Simple problem solving vs. building more complicated models and interfaces, grabbing data from the net, automating emails or SMS messages, etc.) Even if not directly applicable to their field of study, I really believe it's valuable to broaden students' perspective of what's possible. IMO, there is just far too little exposure to computer science. Q: How are we going to pay for all of the social promises we've made in this country (social security, etc.)?!? A: Well (I tell my students) you'd better get more productive, or there won't be enough output to go around!! Maybe I'm young and naive about what's attainable... (BTW, I do like Helen's screencasts and other web resources.... and your's too, Murry!) -RG
From: Kevin J. McCann on 12 Aug 2010 05:25 Murray, I totally agree with these 3 "requirements". There is nothing more disheartening to a student who is new to Mathematica that to have the last hour's work disappear for reasons that are not even clear. I have gotten in the habit of saving often ("save early, save often"). I have a number of calculations that can take a lot of memory, and if this gets too big, it can crash Mathematica with ensuing wailing and gnashing of teeth. Kevin Murray Eisenberg wrote: > The main issues, from my point of view are simply to ensure: > > (1) if Mathematica crashes, you only lose the past so-many minutes work; and > > (2) you can readily retrieve earlier versions of a notebook; > > (3) and take care of all this directly from within Mathematica. > > Of course one uses other backup tools to back up whole folders, > partitions, or drives. >
From: David Bailey on 12 Aug 2010 05:28
On 11/08/10 09:49, Murray Eisenberg wrote: > The main issues, from my point of view are simply to ensure: > > (1) if Mathematica crashes, you only lose the past so-many minutes work; and > > (2) you can readily retrieve earlier versions of a notebook; > > (3) and take care of all this directly from within Mathematica. > I don't want something that saves at regular intervals, because inevitably it will save part way through a long set of changes, and produce something inconsistent. Maybe some option to take a copy the file each time it is saved, to a stack of back versions. Also, when Mathematica starts to get into a mess - as inevitably it does now and again - I don't really want it writing backup files, etc. I am not sure there is a good fully automatic solution to the problem. David Bailey http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk |