Reputation
Top tag
Next privilege 2,500 Rep.
Create tag synonyms
Badges
8 14
Newest
 Yearling
Impact
~30k people reached

15h
reviewed Approve Mathematica won't maximize my function
Jul
29
comment Implementing Picard's Iteration for solving ODEs
FWIW, there was an article about Picard iteration in TMJ about ten years ago, I've found it online: mathematica-journal.com/issue/v10i1/contents/Picard/…
Jul
23
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
@vonjd: part 2: I'm already in about a dozen quant groups on LinkedIn, and even in this professional network you get bombarded with silliness. Way too many people who don't know much and then regurgitate wrong mantras. Not interested in more clown exposure.
Jul
23
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
@vonjd: part 1: probably not. The broader the topic, the more trolls. I just joined aviation.stackexchange, and I see already how many jackass opinions and "questions" are being "debated" there. Granted, there are also trolls in this group, but the topic is much more specific than "quant finance" or "aviation", so you can expect less trollery in the replies. In some 20 years of quant finance I've encountered way too many clowns to join yet another quant group.
Jul
23
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
Bingo! You got it!
Jul
23
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
@RonaldMonson: the degree to which you do testing and QA is a broad spectrum. If you prefer earlier access and accept more bugs, then that is your preference (not mine), and WRI agrees with you. But then you have what I called "treat quality as a third-class citizen". I don't think that way, but you do and WRI does ... then I think you have less to complain than I have. Lucky you! I agree that early access / lower quality vs. later access / thoroughly tested is a matter of personal preference. I won't disagree with yours.
Jul
23
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
@RonaldMonson: this new "streamlined technology stack" is probably a good thing. If it allows more frequent releases, it's an improvement. But as I said above, if you cut corners on testing and QA, you get ... THIS! The new "streamlined technology stack" should not have anything to do with the thoroughness of testing and QA. If you treat quality as a third-class citizen, you get exactly what we're experiencing with M10 through 10.2. In theory it should be clear that especially with many new features you should intensify the testing and QA efforts!
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
a year or so for a bug fix? I've filed bug reports in 2003, that was 5.0 or 5.1, and they were acknowledged as bugs, and they're aren't fixed today. And about ten years ago the director for kernel technology gave a talk on a conf in which he claimed that an analysis of the bug report database showed that about half of the bugs are fixed in 2 weeks (was it ten days?). I don't think these stats still hold ...
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
@alancalvitti: No, I won't continue this discussion. Make your proposal to the conference, as you suggested, good luck.
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
@alancalvitti: OK, but in your previous comments you never said that you thought of this as an incentive program. OK, what you mull is perhaps a viable thought, but no more than that: a thought. It will never happen. They know of plenty of very capable people who would like to be alpha or beta testers, and they're turned down. Next, even when you are alpha or beta tester, as I have been several times, they treat you like everyone else: archive the bug reports and perhaps deal with them, or just start reading the next one. External testers don't fix anything -- FIXING is the bottleneck.
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
Well, you COULD do it right. With proper testing and good QA you can manage a lot of moving parts at the same time. You just can't take short-cuts!
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
@alancalvitti: and your point is ...? I agree with your claim that WRI uses crowdsourcing to find bugs, but I'm allowed to criticize that. You shouldn't be using crowdsourcing to cut corners on testing and QA. And tech support has nothing to do with this, they don't fix bugs. They archive the bug reports and try to answer a few of them. Your last two comments seem rather orthogonal to the original topic, in my opinion. Don't be surprised if I don't respond to your comments anymore in this discussion.
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
In the end it still comes down to testing and independent QA. Additing features can be nice, but not untested and "un-QA'ed". Some technical debt is necessary (I think of it as the "low-level plumbing"). Good infra/"plumbing" is a blessing. But it becomes a curse-with-interest if you neglect the core and only focus on new features and then cut corners on testing.
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
agreed, but adding bugs with new features/releases is a matter of testing (unit testing and regression testing, and other types), NOT with frequent releases. As I said, frequent release cycles don't necessarily coincide with more and more bugs. Companies like Amazon and ebay are extremely agile and are making hundreds of production releases every day, and the result is getting better and better, not buggier and buggier. Of course, M cannot be re-released that fast, but my point is that increase of bugginess is a matter of testing/QA, not release cycles.
Jul
22
comment Why did Wolfram Research change their release policy?
In theory, shorter release cycles would be a GOOD thing. Shorter release cycles doesn't necessarily mean that you have to accept many new bugs. It does here, in the case of Mathematica, but in general, shorter release cycles does not necessarily mean many new bugs. In theory, quite the contrary: shorter release cycles allow you to be more agile and allow you to push out bug fixes much faster, actually lowering the time of vulnerability.
Jul
18
comment Elegant high precision `log1p`?
yes, continued fraction
Jul
18
answered Elegant high precision `log1p`?
Jul
13
reviewed Approve How do I resolve a Part::partd: message
Jun
28
awarded  Yearling
Jun
20
reviewed Approve Executing Mathematica code via Notepad++