Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica > #1747 > unrolled thread

Function Option Names

Back to article view | Back to comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica

Contents

  Function Option Names mmausr <opngid@gmail.com> - 2011-04-17 11:54 +0000
    Re: Function Option Names "Sjoerd C. de Vries" <sjoerd.c.devries@gmail.com> - 2011-04-17 23:16 +0000
      Re: Function Option Names mmausr <opngid@gmail.com> - 2011-04-21 07:11 +0000

#1747 — Function Option Names

I'm curious why some option names are strings (e.g. options to the
FinancialDerivative function), while other option names are symbols
(e.g. options to the ListPlot function).

More generally, why are some parameters of built-in functions
specified as strings and others specified as symbols that evaluate to
themselves?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1772

My feeling is that this is to prevent filling up namespace too
quickly. The more symbols get into the system namespace the slower it
will get (though I think the difference will be marginal). One of the
disadvantages of using strings is no spellchecking and no name
completion (ctrl-k).

Cheers Sjoerd

More Mathematica questions answered at: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/mathematica





On Apr 17, 1:54 pm, mmausr <opn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm curious why some option names are strings (e.g. options to the
> FinancialDerivative function), while other option names are symbols
> (e.g. options to the ListPlot function).
>
> More generally, why are some parameters of built-in functions
> specified as strings and others specified as symbols that evaluate to
> themselves?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1812

> One of the
> disadvantages of using strings is no spellchecking and no name
> completion (ctrl-k).
>

Precisely.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.soft-sys.math.mathematica

csiph-web