Programming Question for Mathcad Prime

[mzeftel]

We are looking at the programming for Mathcad Prime, and are considering several options. One is to keep programming pretty much as it is in Mathcad 14, and enhance it with user suggestions.

Another option is to put programming inside a box like the Solve Block box in Mathcad Prime. That would make it easier to do some things that users have been asking for:

* break up programs into blocks
* make programs look like programs in other applications
* break programs over pages
* add comments on the same line
* easier to edit a program
* could have disabled regions in program (not just the entire program.

Disadvantage: could not use program box inside an equation, like 1 + program. Perhaps we could do something special like if.

Another option is for programming to be more like it is in Mathcad currently, with it being a special type of equation.

Advantages:
* More like previous Mathcad
* can be used inside another equation
* more restrictive (so easier for new users to learn)

Disadvantages:

* Can not be easily broken across pages
* harder to edit
* can not easily add comments on the same line

We'd like to go with box version, but want to check if any of you see problems with it. Do you use inline programs inside equations? Whichever way we go, we would ensure backwards compatibility with previous programs. I've been recording requests, both recently and from previous requests, so we will implement as much as we can.

Let us know what you think.

Mona

[TedDiehl,PhD]

All,

Sorry about the response yesterday of

Q2FuIHlvdSBzdGlsbCBwb3N0IHBpY3R1ciBzaG93IGEgZnVuY3Rpb24gd2l0aCBhcmd1bWVudHMg
b24gTEhTCgpUZWQKLS0tL ........

I tried replying from my blackberry with a simple comment and I guess
Blackberries do not understand simple PowerUser English!

Ted

[StuartBruff]

On 11/23/2009 2:12:53 PM, Mona Zeftel wrote:
>We are looking at the
>programming for Mathcad Prime,
>and are considering several
>options. ---
>Let us know what you think.

Tom's being awfully quiet on this ...

Stuart

[RichardJ]

On 11/26/2009 4:41:48 AM, Stuart Bruff wrote:

>Tom's being awfully quiet on this ...

Maybe he's not checking these forums any more. There was such a long dead period he may have given up on them. He didn't respond to the recent threads on "Reference and Include", "Mathcad Programming", or "2D and 3D plots suggestions" either. Neither you or I responded to those posts either, but in my case it was because I was traveling in Asia. What's your excuse ? 😉

I have it set to notify me by email when something is posted to this forum, because it's usually not worth checking it every day.

Richard

[StuartBruff]

On 11/23/2009 2:12:53 PM, Mona Zeftel wrote:
== We are looking at the programming for Mathcad Prime, and are considering several options.
== Let us know what you think.

There are few non Power Users who it might be worthwhile asking this question of, particularly the Russians, eg Valery, Yuri and Viktor. Is there some means by which they can be brought into the discussion? (eg, extend membership of the PU group to them)

Stuart

[henningj1]

Mona,

This may have been posted already, I haven't read through this entire thread. Here's my 2�...

The real benefit of Mathcad is it's self documenting capability. The thing that distinguishes it from MatLab or Excel or Mathematica is that you can print your worksheet out and anyone can read it. Ok, programs aren't THAT intuitive to the non-user, but burying programming inside a single variable or function means that printouts become as readable as an excel spreadsheet. Those embedded programs will be no different from an excel formula or macro that can't be seen on the printed page. If we start burying esoteric code, then we might as well be using some other software. This is an overstatement (I have my own library of DLL's and resource sheets) but it pushes Mathcad in the direction of the "other guys".

Jeff Henning

[henningj1]

Mona,

This may have been posted already, I haven't read through this entire thread. Here's my 2�...

The real benefit of Mathcad is it's self documenting capability. The thing that distinguishes it from MatLab or Excel or Mathematica is that you can print your worksheet out and anyone can read it. Ok, programs aren't THAT intuitive to the non-user, but burying programming inside a single variable or function means that printouts become as readable as an excel spreadsheet. Those embedded programs will be no different from an excel formula or macro that can't be seen on the printed page. If we start burying esoteric code, then we might as well be using some other software. This is an overstatement (I have my own library of DLL's and resource sheets) but it pushes Mathcad in the direction of the "other guys".

Jeff Henning

[RichardJ]

Something just occurred to me. The reason it just occurred to me is that I am currently trying to trace a bug back through nested programs, and in one of those programs there is a loop that executes about 200,000 times. The bug occurs at one specific loop index. Tracing this in the current debugger sucks. OK though, that debugger was added as an afterthought, and it is certainly better than nothing. Now there is no excuse though! Think about a decent debugger for programs now, while you are designing them! I don't think we should need to spell out the requirements of a halfway decent debugger to a company that has as many software engineers as PTC, but a minimum requirement is that I don't need to modify the program to make it work (as I do now)! I want to be able to right click on a line and flag it to pause or trace specified variables on that line (highlighting such lines would be a good idea). I want to be able to do that based on certain conditions (so if I know there is a problem on the 100,000th iteration I don't need to look at 100,000 lines of debug information to get what I need).

Richard

[PhilipOakley]

Nested solving.

It has just come up in the normal collaboratory.

It should be possible to nest the solver(s).

Though possibly not recursively, nor round robin 😉

Philip Oakley