Reputation
2,454
Top tag
Next privilege 2,500 Rep.
Create tag synonyms
Badges
8 14
Newest
 Yearling
Impact
~35k people reached

Jan
12
comment Two ways of map a function on the list: Which one is faster?
Yes, we have to distinguish two levels of listability, a top-level version and a low-level version. And turning on the top-level version degrades the performance of the low-level version. I can't say I like the naming here.
Jan
12
comment Two ways of map a function on the list: Which one is faster?
Yes, thanks. I like your listableQ. I still think that on functions which work on packed arrays using the top-level Listable attribute should just discard that effect-free instead of causing carnage (breaking listability). You write "confirmation that they are indeed Listable), but using it breaks the listability, which doesn't seem all that confirmatory to me at all.
Jan
12
comment Two ways of map a function on the list: Which one is faster?
Is this a bug or a feature? I've just run into this trap and accidentally slowed down listable operations by explicitly setting symbol attributes to Listable. If setting the attribute explicitly to a symbol/operation that has it built-in is not innocuous, that seems to be a design flaw to me. I'm not saying it's a bug (implementation-wise), but am I allowed to consider this a conceptual flaw? Why is setting the Listable attribute here not effect-free?
Sep
8
reviewed Approve How do you insert more columns into Table cells?
Sep
8
reviewed Approve How can I format a table to look nice?
Aug
26
reviewed Approve Foreign Keyboards and Mathematica?
Aug
21
comment Are you able to use CUDA on Linux?
@Purboo: Try upgrading the NVidia drivers to 352.30, that's really the current version.
Aug
20
comment Are you able to use CUDA on Linux?
Still, that means you're on an old toolkit version. The current CUDA version is 7, we have 7.5 as release candidate, and WRI just confirmed to me they only support 6. Toolkit 7 came out several months ago!
Aug
20
comment Are you able to use CUDA on Linux?
I suspect the problem is related to the fact that WRI only supports old CUDA driver, runtime, and toolkit versions. I sent them an email and asked if they support toolkit version 7 now (because the link below on this page goes to a page that reveals it's toolkit version 6), and the reply was the confirmation that they do indeed only support toolkit version 6 and not 7 and that I should downgrade to 6. Obviously I won't do that, kinda silly, but the person confirmed my suspicion about 7 not being supported. Also your NVidia drivers themselves are plenty old, 346.xx, whereas current is 352.30.
Aug
10
comment Prevent 10.2 from creating “Wolfram Mathematica” directory on Linux
Is this the intended behavior? Or is this faulty behavior? I don't really like a "Wolfram Mathematica" directory under my ~/Documents directory.
Aug
10
comment Operating on a dataset named “data” triggers an error message
geeeeeeeeeeeez!
Aug
4
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.