Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

writings.stephenwolfram.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 125 posts

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#101

Post by throwsalj2rttw »

Archit3ch wrote: post #78
srean wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not looked at the implementation but isn't the idea to write a Lispy language in Rust (in other words, Mathematica the language ) and then write the differentiation and other routines in that .

They had to patch the Rust compiler to natively support AutoDiff. Contrast with Julia where it can be a regular Julia library,

I mean you can do autodiff with a regular library in Rust. Enzyme is just a very specific type of autodiff which transforms after some compilation has taken place.

I don't know that you can match something speedwise like a JIT or Expression Templates in rust though without using something like Enzyme.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#102

Post by electriclove »

Vaslo wrote: post #14

I remember using it in my college days in the 90s. People joining my company from academia usually know Mathematica along with Python or R. When we tell them we don’t use Mathematica they are sometimes initially concerned. They are typically quite opinionated and I have yet to hear an employee complain about no longer having access to Mathematica. Or SPSS, SAS, or MiniTab for that matter.

What do you use at your company?

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#103

Post by gus_massa »

amelius wrote: post #84
Lucasoato wrote: post #2

I’ve used Mathematica at university, it’s so great! Creating fractals, animations and so on is so easy and intuitive. The problem though is that Wolfram is a walled garden. When you think about integrating it in an enterprise environment, you get hit by such high costs, it stops making sense. Imagine if they open sourced it, I feel like their products have so much utility, buried deep down Wolfram ecosystem and conve…

True but on the other hand it is really impressive how Stephen Wolfram managed to build a viable company around scientific software.

Impressive indeed, but it makes sense if you call it "Wolfram-Jupyter" and you notice the guy made it 20 years before it was cool.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#104

Post by rcarmo »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #99
UncleSlacky wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also emulate a Pi using QEMU to run Mathematica (slowly!) on other platforms, see e.g. https://www.thelinuxvault.net/blog/how-to-run-the-raspberry-...

on a Mac you should be able to emulate it pretty quickly since it's arm to arm

Last anyone tried that in earnest, the binary executable formats were of course incompatible and there were hardware checks.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#105

Post by mycall »

adius wrote: post #63
IshKebab wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Reimplementation in Rust It's so disappointing to see CLAUDE.md in projects like these. Basically rules it out for serious use.

Author here: I absolutely do not understand this mindset. It has almost 20K unit tests by now and hundreds of full end-to-end tests of complicated scripts to ensure it works and matches the output of Wolframscript. Why does it matter that I was using Claude to help me implement it?

https://github.com/ad-si/Woxi/tree/main/tests

Spot checking, I don't see any issues.

e.g. https://github.com/ad-si/Woxi/blob/main/tests/list_tests.rs

  #[test]
  fn first() {
    assert_eq!(interpret("First[{1, 2, 3}]").unwrap(), "1");
    assert_eq!(interpret("First[{a, b, c}]").unwrap(), "a");
    assert_eq!(interpret("First[{True, False, False}]").unwrap(), "True");
  }

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#106

Post by UltraSane »

bonzini wrote: post #88
srean wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not looked at the implementation but isn't the idea to write a Lispy language in Rust (in other words, Mathematica the language ) and then write the differentiation and other routines in that .

No, they're implementing all functions, all matching etc. in Rust.

Will that be faster? Seems like it should be a lot faster.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#107

Post by UltraSane »

everyone wrote: post #38

I just learned that Stephen Wolfram himself is a bit of a crank apparently. https://youtu.be/fO9iRDPXvT4?si=CbCjBtOSM5JhgYUF

Wolfram is too smart to be a true crank, but his ego is even bigger than his IQ and he thinks he should rank up there with Newton and Einstein.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#108

Post by UltraSane »

geertj wrote: post #87
zozbot234 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would not call him a crank > And he writes about his work and himself in grandiose ways, usually comparing himself to Newton and Einstein ... Nothing major has come out of his research okay

The word ‘crank’ is a dismissive insult. Wolfram is definitely eccentric, probably hard to work with, but also undoubtedly smart. What good does it do to dismiss him? He’s doing nothing wrong spending his own money the way he wants to. And who knows something will come out of this. Similar to GP I’d like to see more of this.

A crank is a real pattern of behavior where a person tries to prove things they don't have enough knowledge and intelligence to even understand correctly.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#109

Post by Iolaum »

krackers wrote: post #51
mlpicker wrote: post #48

The AI assistant complaints track with what I see on my end. Any general model I throw Wolfram Language at does noticeably worse than it does on Python. That part isn't surprising. There just isn't much public Wolfram code to learn from next to the mountain of Python sitting on github. It keeps guessing function names that sound plausible but don't exist. Spent an afternoon last week fixing hallucinated options on an…

>It keeps guessing function names that sound plausible but don't exist. That's surprising considering how good their documentation is. A tool using LLM should have no problem with that. WolframLanguage is almost ideal for an LLM actually.

LLM's learn by training on examples more than by training on documentation. Especially since examples are usually bigger in data size.

Re: Wolfram Language and Mathematica version 15

#110

Post by pkaye »

bloaf wrote: post #50
alok-g wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here are some other alternatives (some internally use free Wolfram engine): Reimplementation in Rust: https://github.com/ad-si/Woxi WLJS Notebook: https://wljs.io VS Code extension: https://github.com/vanbaalon/wolfbook

How do they stack up doing actual computer algebra things like symbolic integration? https://www.12000.org/my_notes/CAS_integration_tests/reports... Note that alternative open source solvers like Fricas fail 10x the integrals in that corpus.

Rubi is just rule based integration. So its like looking up a book of integral formulas and encoding them as rules. It does mean you need a minimum number of other features like partial fraction decomposition, polynomial factoring so it demonstrates some capability. Many of the other Mathematica like CAS end up using the Rubi rules themselves.

But indefinite integration is just a small aspect of CAS capabilities. What about integration over a line or surface, definite integration and dealing with singularities, differential equations, solving equations under assumptions, simplifying equations.

Post reply on HN