11–20 of 188 posts
I like Mathematica and use it regularly. But I did not see any benefits of using it over python as a tool that Claude Code can use. Every script it produced in wolfram was slower with worse answers than python. Wolfram people are really trying but so far the results are not very good.
Sounds cool. Aside, I hate the fact that I read posts like these and just subconsciously start counting the em-dashes and the "it's not just [thing], it's [other thing]" phrasing. It makes me think it's just more AI.
If you go back to a random much older post you’ll find emdashes aplenty. e.g. https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2014/07/launching-mathem...
Sounds cool. Aside, I hate the fact that I read posts like these and just subconsciously start counting the em-dashes and the "it's not just [thing], it's [other thing]" phrasing. It makes me think it's just more AI.
If there is one person who likes to hear himself talk too much to use AI, it's got to be Stephen Wolfram.
Sounds cool. Aside, I hate the fact that I read posts like these and just subconsciously start counting the em-dashes and the "it's not just [thing], it's [other thing]" phrasing. It makes me think it's just more AI.
The other day I formatted a sentence out loud in the "it's not just x it's y" structure and immediately felt gross, despite having done it probably a million times in my lifetime. That was an out-of-body feeling.
Sounds cool. Aside, I hate the fact that I read posts like these and just subconsciously start counting the em-dashes and the "it's not just [thing], it's [other thing]" phrasing. It makes me think it's just more AI.
If you really want to know: more than one emmy-dash per paragraph is probably excessive. > LLMs don’t—and can’t—do everything. What they do is very impressive—and useful. It’s broad. And in many ways it’s human-like. But it’s not precise. And in the end it’s not about deep computation. This is a mess. What is the flow here? Two abrupt interrupts ( and useful ) followed by stubby sentences. Yucky.
Sounds cool. Aside, I hate the fact that I read posts like these and just subconsciously start counting the em-dashes and the "it's not just [thing], it's [other thing]" phrasing. It makes me think it's just more AI.
I like Mathematica and use it regularly. But I did not see any benefits of using it over python as a tool that Claude Code can use. Every script it produced in wolfram was slower with worse answers than python. Wolfram people are really trying but so far the results are not very good.
Back when I was using it, mathematica was unmatched in its ability to find integrals. Has python caught up there?
however, even this advantage is eaten away somewhat because the models themselves are decent at solving hard integrals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Back when I was using it, mathematica was unmatched in its ability to find integrals. Has python caught up there?
sympy is good enough for typical uses. the user interface is worse but that doesn't matter to Claude. I imagine if you have some really weird symbolic or numeric integrals, Mathematica may have some highly sophisticated algorithms where it would have an edge. however, even this advantage is eaten away somewhat because the models themselves are decent at solving hard integrals.
I like Mathematica and use it regularly. But I did not see any benefits of using it over python as a tool that Claude Code can use. Every script it produced in wolfram was slower with worse answers than python. Wolfram people are really trying but so far the results are not very good.
What do you think the problem is?
But for most internet applications (as opposed to "math" stuff) I would think Python is still a better language choice.