Timeline for Is there an open source implementation of Mathematica-the-language?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 2, 2022 at 20:45 | comment | added | toddmo | The answer is no longer "nope". Mathics is it. | |
| Jul 15, 2022 at 19:47 | comment | added | Rudy Potter | While not "open source", it is perhaps worth mentioning here that Mathematica is available for Raspberry Pi computers (bundled with NOOBS) and is free for noncommercial use. https://www.wolfram.com/raspberry-pi/ | |
| Jan 26, 2020 at 21:15 | comment | added | Hayashi Yoshiaki | this is my attempt to mimic Mathematica syntax with C++ gitlab.com/yoshiF7d/math | |
| Sep 20, 2018 at 12:48 | comment | added | Reb.Cabin | Pattern-matching, replacement rules, "conditional term rewriting," are the core features that set Mathematica apart (and 'above' IMO) from almost everything else on the planet (ok, there is Maude and maybe parts of Coq, but not much else). These features have nothing to do with syntax, with the libraries of solvers, with applications. Thankfully, they finally gave a name to the language itself ("Wolfram") so we can stop confusing the language with the applications. It's classic "form versus content," with Wolfram's being the form and Mathematica's being the content. | |
| Jul 24, 2017 at 7:24 | answer | added | Cory Walker | timeline score: 28 | |
| May 23, 2017 at 12:35 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Jun 30, 2016 at 14:24 | comment | added | murray | Exactly what is meant by "Mathematica-the-language"? Just what the Documentation Center includes under "Core Language & Structure"? If so, that would exclude string manipulation and graphics, among other things. | |
| S Jun 30, 2016 at 12:00 | history | suggested | masterxilo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
new mathics link
|
| Jun 30, 2016 at 11:31 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 30, 2016 at 12:00 | |||||
| Mar 21, 2016 at 11:18 | comment | added | ELLIOTTCABLE | OP / @user21, just wanted to add a permalink to that post (as it is, indeed, interesting): reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/qisot/… | |
| Nov 9, 2013 at 23:57 | answer | added | MathicsFan | timeline score: 44 | |
| Oct 10, 2012 at 3:05 | comment | added | George Wolfe | I see your point. | |
| Oct 9, 2012 at 3:56 | comment | added | sblom | @GeorgeWolfe, I think it's more like a generic than a counterfeit. And inexpensive or not, the price tag even for the Home Edition (which I own) is high enough to disqualify Mathematica from participation in programming competitions like Google Code Jam. I really want to see a day where Mathematica has as rich of an ecosystem of shared packages as MATLAB has, and I believe that a free clone is very possibly part of the equation. | |
| Oct 8, 2012 at 1:58 | comment | added | George Wolfe | Why would you even want such a thing to exist? It would be like distributing a counterfit pharmaceutical, when the real one is available inexpensively available for experimentation. | |
| Jul 10, 2012 at 6:04 | history | edited | sblom |
edited tags
|
|
| Apr 19, 2012 at 16:30 | vote | accept | sblom | ||
| Apr 19, 2012 at 11:24 | comment | added | user21 | @sblom, you may find this interesting. In the first few paragraphs Stephen talks about a more freely available pure language aspect of Mathematica. | |
| Apr 19, 2012 at 11:01 | comment | added | Leonid Shifrin | @BlueRaja-DannyPflughoeft The question was asked specifically about Mathematica, which is sufficiently different from Matlab to make your comment of no relevance here, particularly given the context of the question. | |
| Apr 19, 2012 at 10:00 | comment | added | BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft | It feels almost like flamebait on this site, but it's worth mentioning anyways, at the very least for future googlers: you may also want to look into Octave, the open-source equivalent to Matlab's language. | |
| Apr 19, 2012 at 8:08 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackMma/status/192887393743933440 | ||
| Apr 19, 2012 at 5:05 | answer | added | Simon | timeline score: 95 | |
| Apr 19, 2012 at 4:29 | comment | added | Dr. belisarius | "Nope" is perhaps too short an answer for such a long question. But nonetheless is true. | |
| Apr 19, 2012 at 4:24 | history | asked | sblom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |