Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maxima is a fine piece of software, and I’m a huge proponent of its development, but doesn’t compete in the breadth or depth of Mathematica (or Maple) at all.
It certainly competes due to the fact of being free software, which is a strong requirement of my workflow. I can try Mathematica and Maple (and love them), but ultimately I have to end using a free software solution.
Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
271–280 of 358 posts
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#272> 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…
You seem to have an axe to grind. They have made a very nice ecosystem over the course of 30 years, they are opening it up more. They are proud of "how uniform, elegant and stable a design we’ve been able to maintain across the whole language." It is difficult to get that in an open source project and ecosystem. This has some marvelous qualities that come from its closed source nature. It is special because of that.…
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#273> 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…
If they open sourced it, it would be less than a year before you'd start seeing "Azure Wolfram" and "AWS Wolfram" and so on and I can sort of understand why he might not want that to happen.
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't they use a more restricted license that prevents that?
Which more restricted open source license would prevent that? There is none!
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#275Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#276Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#277This is very nice. I just tried it with Jupyter and it works. https://imgur.com/VoHXMtS You can also write a inline script. https://pastebin.com/TYWfS3gk Is there a limitation of running only one kernel per machine? I had an instance of wolframscript running, and when I ran a script file, I got this error: > ./test.wl Connection closed by WolframKernel. This generally means the product is unregistered.
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
No axe to grind. I’d like to think I’m a representative sample of my fellow software engineers. I don’t even want to make statements about open vs closed source generally. But as it pertains to developer tools (compilers, interpreters, debuggers, runtimes, standard libraries), open source has been hugely successful, hugely popular, and both individuals and corporations depend on that fact. You’re right, and I think I…
"I’m a representative sample of my fellow software engineers" I'm a bit puzzled about how strongly you seem to be feeling about this topic. Given your comments, you seem to be quite far from the target audience of Mathematica. It's not for software engineers. Most productive work done with Mathematica is not "building software" ... But given all this hostility, have you downloaded it, and have you tried it? Or is all…
As such, this comment:
>But given all this hostility, have you downloaded it, and have you tried it? Or is all this just philosophical (i.e. the least interesting) criticism? There seems to be no experience backing your comments.
does not seem to apply
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m open to being wrong, but my domain is not and has not been web apps. It’s mostly been things like satellite antenna control software, quantum computers, scientific computing, and AI. Each of those domains, in my experience, has been firmly grounded in open source. (It does not mean, of course, that the end product is open source.) I recognize there are some domains that are steeped in closed source solutions with…
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…
http://iverilog.icarus.com/ https://www.veripool.org/wiki/verilator http://www.clifford.at/yosys/ https://symbiflow.github.io/ https://github.com/Qucs/ADMS http://www.myhdl.org/ https://chisel.eecs.berkeley.edu/ https://wiki.debian.org/FPGA
Re: Free Wolfram Engine for Developers
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
You wouldn't happen to be a commentor/author for this Reddit post[0], would you? Your sentiment here seems quite similar. I have no experience at all with hardware design, but it seems like that domain is especially geared towards closed-source for specific reasons. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/FPGA/comments/a5pzs5/prediction_ope...
That is an interesting post. I think there are two other potential ways FPGA tools could become open source: 1) If there are some widely used open hardware devices or open standards. The fact that FPGAs are proprietary designs and can't be copied is a significant barrier. If there was an analogue of ARM in the FPGA world that could open up open source dev tools too. 2) DIY FPGA. This one is almost certainly much furt…
There is an open FPGA hardware implementation:
https://github.com/haojunliu/OpenFPGA https://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2014/EECS-2014-4...
More resources: