[Haskell-cafe] Implementing Mathematica

[Jacques Carette]

Andrew Coppin wrote:
> Lennart Augustsson wrote:
>> Why do you seem so in awe of Mathematica?
>
> Oh, well, I guess it is only the most powerful maths software ever 
> written... no biggie.
No, it is one of several.  In very little time I can find 20 things that 
Maple does better than Mathematica.  In the same amount of time, I can 
find 20 things that Mathematica does better than Maple. 

[Actually, the most obvious is that its marketing is miles better; so 
good that it makes blind evangelists out of people who have not even 
tried the competitors].

>> It's just another language with a good set of libraries.  Claims that 
>> it is the best, fastest, etc comes from Wolfram advertising, no 
>> doubt. :)
>
> The claim that it is the fastest clearly doesn't hold (much to my 
> surprise). The claim that it is the most powerful, well... I have yet 
> to see anything that can come close to the symbolic power of Mathematica.
Give Maple a try.  For example, you'll find that:
1) Maple's DE solver beats Mathematica hands-down
2) Mathematica's definite integrator beats Maples hands-down
3) Maple's symbolic non-linear equation solver is best
4) Mathematica's definite summation (ie finding closed forms) is best
and on and on.  [I don't know enough about the other systems to make 
similar comparison lists].

You got suckered by their marketing.  Get your head out of the sand, and 
take a good look around what is available.

Jacques