Mathematica vs Matlab
-
This language excels at symbolic manipulation
-
When I write code in this language I can be very sure it is correct
-
I often feel like I am not smart enough to write this language
-
I use this language out of choice
-
I still discover new features of this language on a fairly regular basis
-
Programs written in this language will usually work in future versions of the language
-
This language has unusual features that I often miss when using other languages
-
This is a high level language
-
This language matches it's problem domain particularly well.
-
This language is built on a small core of orthogonal features
-
The semantics of this language are much different than other languages I know.
-
This language is well documented
-
This language has a very coherent design
-
Code written in this language will usually run in all the major implementations if it runs in one of them.
-
I enjoy playing with this language but would never use it for "real code"
-
This language has a good community
-
This language has a niche in which it is great
-
Code written in this language tends to be terse
-
This language has a high quality implementation
-
If this language didn't exist, I would have trouble finding a satisfactory replacement
-
I enjoy using this language
-
This language is best for very large projects
-
I would use this language for a web project
-
This language is very flexible
-
This language has a niche outside of which I would not use it
-
If my code in this language successfully compiles, there is a good chance my code is correct.
-
This language is unusually bad for beginners
-
This language is likely to have a strong influence on future languages
-
Code written in this language tends to be very reliable
-
This language is good for scientific computing
-
This language is expressive
-
I would use this language for writing server programs
-
It is easy to debug programs written in this language when it goes wrong
-
There are many good commercial tools for this language
-
This language is best for very small projects
-
This language is well suited for an agile development approach using short iterations.
-
This language has well-organized libraries with consistent, carefully thought-out interfaces
-
Learning this language improved my ability as a programmer
-
This language has many features which feel "tacked on"
-
I usually use this language on solo projects
-
I often write things in this language with the intent of rewriting them in something else later
-
This language has a wide variety of agreed-upon conventions, which are generally adhered to reasonably well, and which increase my productivity
-
This language encourages writing reusable code.
-
There is a wide variety of open source code written in this language
-
I can imagine this will be a popular language in twenty years time
-
There is a lot of accidental complexity when writing code in this language
-
I find code written in this language very elegant
-
There are many good tools for this language
-
This language encourages writing code that is easy to maintain.
-
Programs written in this language tend to play well with others
-
I find it easy to write efficient code in this language
-
I learned this language early in my career as a programmer
-
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 likely to be around for a very long time
-
I would use this language for writing programs for an embedded hardware platform
-
I am reluctant to admit to knowing this language
-
This language has a strong static type system
-
It's unusual for me to discover unfamiliar features
-
The resources for learning this language are of high quality
-
I would use this language for casual scripting
-
Learning this language significantly changed how I use other languages.
-
This language allows me to write programs where I know exactly what they are doing under the hood
-
This language has a good library distribution mechanism.
-
It is easy to tell at a glance what code in this language does
-
I would use this language for mobile applications
-
There are many good open-source tools for this language
-
I would use this language as a scripting language embedded inside a larger application
-
This language excels at text processing
-
This language excels at concurrency
-
This language has a very dogmatic community
-
I would like to write more of this language than I currently do
-
This language has a very rigid idea of how things should be done
-
I rarely have difficulty abstracting patterns I find in my code
-
This language is large
-
I can imagine using this language in my day job
-
I would list this language on my resume
-
Libraries in this language tend to be well documented.
-
Programs written in this language tend to be efficient
-
The thought that I may still be using this language in twenty years time fills me with dread
-
This language is suitable for real-time applications
-
I would recommend most programmers learn this language, regardless of whether they have a specific need for it
-
This is a mainstream language
-
This language is easier to use for it's problem domain by removing unneeded expressiveness (such as not being Turing complete).
-
I regularly use this language
-
I often get angry when writing code in this language
-
This language is minimal
-
This language makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot
-
When I run into problems my colleagues can provide me with immediate help with this language
-
This language is good for numeric computing
-
This language is good for beginners
-
This language would be good for teaching children to write software
-
I know this language well
-
I would use this language to write a command-line app
-
Developers who primarily use this language often burn out after a few years
-
I find this language easy to prototype in
-
I usually use this language on projects with many other members
-
This language is likely to be a passing fad
-
Code written in this language tends to be verbose
-
I am sometimes embarrassed to admit to my peers that I know this language
-
I know many other people who use this language
-
I use many applications written in 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 is a low level language
-
Writing code in this language is a lot of work
-
I would use this language for a desktop GUI project
-
This language is frequently used for applications it isn't suitable for
-
This language is good for distributed computing
-
Code written in this language is very readable
-
This language has an annoying syntax
-
Third-party libraries are readily available, well-documented, and of high quality
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 Matlab 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.