FYI: After downloading and installing a 3GB executable, the software needs to be activated with a developer ID. Knowing that could've saved me the trouble.
Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
161–170 of 358 posts
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nearly all professional Windows development has been and still is done in Visual Studio. This alone makes your "uncommon" claim void, and there are other examples outside of the Windows ecosystem equally well-rooted in proprietory tools.
I have changed 7 jobs in 15 years so far and not once I have done Windows development in Visual Studio. Nor have I seen anyone in my company doing so. I would say Windows development in Visual Studio is by far uncommon when you compare with technologies like Python, C (with GCC or Clang), Java (OpenJDK), JavaScript, etc.
c# is one of the most popular languages in the world. what are those people using?
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#163Can anyone explain the difference between the Wolfram Language and Matlab/Julia? I understand it has a better story for symbolic mathematics, but how often do people need that? Personally, I've found numeric computation more useful in 99% of the cases; do others have a different experience?
Wolfram language has a very different syntax that Matlab or really any other programming language, and it has a lot of lisp-like metaprogramming capability. It's not as well thought-out as a proper lisp like Clojure, it's verbose and there's a lot of weird corner cases. The editor is very different as well: Mathematica pioneered the notebook concept that was copied by Jupyter, and the Mathematica user experience is s…
Not only would I not call Clojure a "proper lisp" but since it doesn't run any Lisp code and lacks fundamental Lisp data structures (e.g conses), I wouldn't even call it a Lisp.
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel the same, except with Common Lisp, whose interactivity is maybe only rivaled by Smalltalk, and whose performance can be made close to that of C for real-world applications.
I don't think interactivity and performance are enough to make a good production language. For example, I find Java painful to write without a good IDE, because of all the boilerplate, however it's that boilerplate that makes it very easy to read and refactor.
Agreed. They have to have a good way to write it (an IDE), a good debugger, a good profiler, a good library ecosystem, a good community, a good deployment story, reproducibility, portability across platforms, etc. I find commercial support helpful as well. Common Lisp has all of that.
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#165A couple of friction points right now trying to install. One its a 3GB app package on the mac but I guess i'm not surprised based on all that is included, would be interesting to see what, if any, options there are for a modular deployment. But sadly after I signed up for a wolfram account I am unable to activate the install from the terminal :-(
Try following these installation instructions for your platform (Mac, Windows, or Linux): http://support.wolfram.com/kb/45743
All good until step 17. I get this error: "(7) Unable to connect". It is probably the proxy... How can I change the setting for it?
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything you, as an employee of Wolfram, create or prototype or whatever with it can have a future. You would have no questions asked. And as an employee I presume you also get the possibility to inspect the source, and perhaps even email the dev teams directly to fix or modify things as you see fit. In such an environment, even simple things like prototyping are great. Actually, the cases you described, making an in…
You make some very good points, and you might be right. My educated guess is that this strategy is to get as many people as possible to try this. That would mean letting people do prototypes for commercial purposes too, but not to ship in production. Now, whether that will be enough to keep people hooked so that they use us in production as well depends on a lot of factors, both technical and political. I think your…
I think that what Wolfram is missing is that devs are not interested in getting hooked and then paying subscription fees. The payment model is the problem and devs won't be easily suckered by a free version.
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have changed 7 jobs in 15 years so far and not once I have done Windows development in Visual Studio. Nor have I seen anyone in my company doing so. I would say Windows development in Visual Studio is by far uncommon when you compare with technologies like Python, C (with GCC or Clang), Java (OpenJDK), JavaScript, etc.
c# is one of the most popular languages in the world. what are those people using?
Roslyn? https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just answering your honest question: >What programming language stack do you use that’s closed source? Verilog/System Verilog (generally HDL/FPGA/ASIC design/verification). Yes, it's a niche (some may even say it's not software, it's hardware, but it is indeed a large code base that requires a software engineering environment/toolchain/practices/etc...). Again, just answering your questi…
There’s also Q [0] and kdb+ [1] as another example. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_(programming_language_from... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kdb%2B
Kdb is a very niche product that has open source alternatives that are made use of by the rest of the software industry outside of FinTech. It's not bad, it's just not what the market wants to use because it's a closed box.
Wikipedia has an article on Time series databases and they contain a short list of popular TSDBs [0]. On that list 11 are libre-software to some degree and 4 are commercial. Relational TSDBs are new to the open source space but they're still being built despite there being the existing kdb+. This shows that people will spend considerably more funds to engineer a replacement (and give that replacement away for free) to avoid using a closed source product for this use case.
[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_series_database#List_of_t...
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#169> Why Aren’t You Using Our Technology? It’s not open source. Even if the engine is “free”, I don’t want to build an open source product with it and hope to be granted a “free production license.” If I build something on my own time I don’t want to ask my employer to purchase a “production license” as soon as it becomes useful. Wolfram believes that mathematics software (or “computational knowledge” or whatever he cal…
At one time or another, I attended a talk given by wolfram and asked roughly the same question. His response belittled the question, calling it naive. His smugness was astoundingly tone deaf. Until he figures out how to answer questions like this without using shame to cow developers into line, I’m staying away.
he gave you nuggets of wisdom imo.
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which more restricted open source license would prevent that? There is none!
It can be done. If no license allows you to what you want, get your lawyer/s to draft one for you
Open source has a clear definition. The kind of license you want is not compatible with that. It would be a valid software license, but not open source.