Mathematica vs APL
-
I know this language well
-
When I write code in this language I can be very sure it is correct
-
This language is good for numeric computing
-
Libraries in this language tend to be well documented.
-
This language is well documented
-
This language is likely to be a passing fad
-
I use a lot of code written in this language which I really don't want to have to make changes to
-
This language is good for beginners
-
This language is suitable for real-time applications
-
I am sometimes embarrassed to admit to my peers that I know this language
-
When I run into problems my colleagues can provide me with immediate help with this language
-
It is too easy to write code in this language that looks like it does one thing but actually does something else
-
This language is unusually bad for beginners
-
I would list this language on my resume
-
This language has many features which feel "tacked on"
-
Code written in this language tends to be very reliable
-
The thought that I may still be using this language in twenty years time fills me with dread
-
I enjoy using this language
-
I would recommend most programmers learn this language, regardless of whether they have a specific need for it
-
Learning this language improved my ability as a programmer
-
This language excels at symbolic manipulation
-
I still discover new features of this language on a fairly regular basis
-
I know many other people who use this language
-
I would like to write more of this language than I currently do
-
There are many good commercial tools for this language
-
If my code in this language successfully compiles, there is a good chance my code is correct.
-
This language matches it's problem domain particularly well.
-
This language would be good for teaching children to write software
-
It is easy to debug programs written in this language when it goes wrong
-
If this language didn't exist, I would have trouble finding a satisfactory replacement
-
This is a mainstream language
-
This language has a very dogmatic community
-
This language has unusual features that I often miss when using other languages
-
This language is likely to have a strong influence on future languages
-
This language has a wide variety of agreed-upon conventions, which are generally adhered to reasonably well, and which increase my productivity
-
I find this language easy to prototype in
-
Programs written in this language will usually work in future versions of the language
-
There is a wide variety of open source code written in this language
-
This language is minimal
-
I regularly use this language
-
I would use this language for a desktop GUI project
-
I usually use this language on projects with many other members
-
I find it easy to write efficient code in this language
-
I enjoy playing with this language but would never use it for "real code"
-
This is a low level language
-
This language has an annoying syntax
-
There are many good tools for this language
-
There are many good open-source tools for this language
-
Third-party libraries are readily available, well-documented, and of high quality
-
Learning this language significantly changed how I use other languages.
-
I learned this language early in my career as a programmer
-
I would use this language for mobile applications
-
This language is frequently used for applications it isn't suitable for
-
The semantics of this language are much different than other languages I know.
-
This language has a niche in which it is great
-
This language is likely to be around for a very long time
-
This language has a very coherent design
-
This language is good for scientific computing
-
This language is large
What's going on here?
The absolute rankings are interesting for large scale comparisons but when you want to know about two specific languages it's much more informative to look at how the two fare when they go directly head to head.
Here are all the statements which we've got enough comparisons between Mathematica and APL to be meaningful and which of the two our users picked.
The order in which we're presenting them is a little arbitrary (sorry), but we've tried to put the things which they're both good at first so as to give you the most interesting picture of it.