18

I read in some questions/answers that people are using Workbench 3.

From where can I get the Workbench 3, which is the most current version and why would I need it?

gwr
  • 13,452
  • 2
  • 47
  • 78
mrz
  • 11,686
  • 2
  • 25
  • 81
  • 6
    You must contact Wolfram Support and they will let you know. (Yes, that is the answer. Workbench 3 is not publicly released.) I would consider this question off-topic here. – Szabolcs Sep 27 '16 at 12:18
  • 7
    @Szabolcs So they still advertise that workbench supports all versions, when it does not and when you as a user have to ask WRI upon hearsay from some Q&A site that a newer version of workbench is in fact available (but hush, hush...)? You have to be kidding - that reminds me about something the Vogon's said in Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy shortly before the Earth was destroyed... :) – gwr Sep 27 '16 at 12:23
  • 2
    @gwr There's no "hush hush". You'll find plenty of information by searching Wolfram Community (if they search function works...) My point is that WB3 is not released, thus the only possible answer is to "ask Wolfram". That makes the question off -topic. When I asked, I got a download link. That was a very long time ago. I think your complaints are valid, but those should also be directed to Wolfram, not me ... – Szabolcs Sep 27 '16 at 12:28
  • @Szabolcs So it seems that I am giving the official answer below. :) – gwr Sep 27 '16 at 12:29
  • @gwr But why? You stated yourself above that it's incompatible. And this (StackExchange) isn't even a Wolfram site, so such an answer won't irritate Wolfram. It will only irritate your fellow users. – Szabolcs Sep 27 '16 at 12:32
  • 3
    @Szabolcs I disagree with you in this regard. Because the confusion of "fellow users" is the confusion of fellow "WRI customers" and exactly that is going to serve as a catalyst. And indeed I am giving the official information here; this is not my confusion but WRI's confusion. – gwr Sep 27 '16 at 12:39
  • 4
    Today I got from my supplier in Germany the Setup Plugin for Eclipse for Workbench 3 and it runs perfectly with Eclipse Neon Release (4.6.0) - after setting the path to MathKernel of Mathematica 11. – mrz Sep 29 '16 at 13:03
  • 3
    @Szabolcs I think it is a perfectly legitimate question and i am glad it was posed. I would prefer this question stays. – magma Sep 29 '16 at 14:42
  • 1
    Since I feel that this question does belong here and in fact must rather be answered by users (not WRI as they do not officially communicate this on their website!) on Q&A sites like this one, I have expanded the question slightly to make it clearer and to fit the rules. It should be reopened imo. @mrz if that is not in your best intentions please tell me, I will then roll back to the old (closed) version. – gwr Oct 05 '16 at 09:17
  • 3
    Wolfram has an up-to-date version of the Eclipse plug-in available for everyone - please see http://support.wolfram.com/kb/27221 for more details. This apparently supports v11. – masterxilo Oct 20 '16 at 08:49
  • You might be interested in the discussion http://community.wolfram.com/groups/-/m/t/947159 – masterxilo Oct 20 '16 at 21:03

2 Answers2

20

Update November 25, 2022 (There is hope after all...)

I was told by @RolfMertig in a comment that I may have been "too harsh" with Workbench/Eclipse and giving it some consideration, I have modified my harsher statements below, albeit leaving some visible as a warning.

For those interested in using Workbench/Eclipse for developing (larger) paclets in textual form, which is beneficial for using version control, refactoring, having an outline for the project etc.: I have now updated my post on community regarding the setup for paclets using Workbench/Eclipse.

In the form suggested in my post, working with PacletInfo.wl and PacletObject (setup manually) in Workbench/Eclipse seems to work fine. A developer may use Run as Wolfram to run test notebooks or directly run a project notebook using:

PacletDirectoryLoad[ <path to the Paclet in development> ];
PacletDataRebuild[];
Needs[ "PublisherID`PacletName`" ] (* or whatever is the main context *)

Nevertheless, even though I really (!) like the effort WRI puts into making the Notebook environment the best place to go for development, there is imho a need to complement this by offering an integrated IDE like Workbench/Eclipse for developing larger pieces of code (shouldn't WL not only be for prototyping?).

The plugin for Eclipse appears to still be useful and I would like to strongly encourage WRI to not let this option die!

Update November 24, 2022 (RIP Workbench/Eclipse)

As can be seen from this post on Wolfram Community the current plugin for Eclipse does not support the modern Paclet format:

  • If you use PacletTools`CreatePaclet["PublisherID`PacletName`"], the directory structure created will start with PublisherID__PacletName/, which is not allowed for a new Wolfram Application project in Eclipse
  • PacletInfo.wl files are unknown to Workbench and will not be recognised as such
  • It is a real PITA to set up larger packages using Workbench and Paclets and even though some of it can simply be done manually (see here), one needs to out comment Needs to get it running in Eclipse without error messages and you cannot address it as a PacletObject in a Notebook.

This rather renders Workbench/Eclipse a dead-end for serious development and that is a real shame, as Wolfram used to actively advertise Workbench. Where is a comparable ease of navagating your file system with a Package Explorer in the Notebook Front-End? In Eclipse, you can search across your project using Ctrl-H or jump from a usage message to the actual implementation in another file by pressing F3—are there equivalent conveniences to be had in the Notebook interface? (Last to mention: Where is a decent dark mode ;-) )

Update November 2, 2016

The issue has obviously now been addressed by WRI and Workbench will not be a branded Eclipse IDE, but rather be a concurrent plug-in for Eclipse. They also updated the Website: Wolfram Workbench.

Maybe there has been some effect of posts like this one? :)

Update

Because I feel that @Szabolcs does have a point I will give a personal and thus "inofficial" answer to your question here, before giving the "official" answer as it can be obtained by reading publicly available information on WRI sites:

I have found that Workbench 2.0 does not support Mathematica Version 10 or higher and I have accordingly asked WRI for a Beta version of Workbench 3 which I was granted. I feel that this handing over a functioning version of Workbench has not been a pure act of goodwill, but rather my right as a customer, since WRI still advertises Workbench 2.0 as I have documented below with all legal implications imo.

The (inofficial) official answer to this question

You should not need Workbench 3.0 (according to WRI's official information on its website!) because as this screenshot from this very minute shows, Workbench 2 is the "state-of-the-art integrated development environment" (www.wolfram.com/products/workbench/):

Workbench 2

Also note that in the Q&A on the same site as of this very minute it says:

WRI Q&A

So the obvious and decisive conclusion is that:

  • either your fellow users in the fora, Q&As and blogs in telling you that Workbench 2.0 does not support Version 10 or higher are wrong
  • or WRI is not telling the truth on its site with all what that might imply
gwr
  • 13,452
  • 2
  • 47
  • 78
  • 3
    Just got a mail regarding my answer here that might be relevant: "You failed to note that we are living in post-factual times". :) – gwr Sep 27 '16 at 14:06
  • gwr could you please describe how and who exactly did you write to? Was it sent via the support pages found in the WRI site or a simple email? did you wait for long before getting an answer? – magma Sep 29 '16 at 14:56
  • gwr, no I just asked how did you ask WRI in order to get a beta version Workbench 3.0. I asked for a beta too, via my country supplier, to no avail. So, how did you communicate with them? – magma Sep 29 '16 at 15:03
  • 2
    @magma Help/ Give Feedback and directly ask Support. – Kuba Oct 05 '16 at 09:22
  • 3
    I wonder if WRI is liable to be hit by a lawsuit because of this. If enough people are inadvertently affected by this false advertising, I'm certain it is. – QuantumDot Oct 05 '16 at 11:52
  • 1
    I wanted to use workbench for debugging. Even though the debugger works, but can't use Mathematica commands or even open new notebook while stepping in the debugger. This makes it useless. The whole idea of debugging is to be able to issue commands inside the debugger to examine things. is-starting-wolfram-workbench-when-mathematica-already-running-not-allowed It seems very few people here use workbench as no one gave an answer to this basic question. – Nasser Nov 24 '22 at 12:59
  • @Nasser So, what are you using for writing Wolfram Language code and especially (larger) Paclets? – gwr Nov 24 '22 at 13:14
  • 1
    @gwr I currently do not develop large code in Mathematica actually. I use Mathematica for small things, so I do not need paclets and just use notebooks. For large application I am writing, I am using Maple because it has a debugger which works. It is a command line debugger (like dbg) but at least I can debug with it. In Mathematica I can't do the same. I found I need a debugger when the code becomes very large (over say 10,000 lines or so). – Nasser Nov 24 '22 at 13:18
  • 1
    @gwr You are a bit harsh: PacletTools is clearly labeled Experimental: https://reference.wolfram.com/language/PacletTools/guide/PacletTools.html So if you just don't use experimental features too much (which is a good idea in general) there is not really any deep problem with WWB. I use it every day (under Linux). – Rolf Mertig Nov 24 '22 at 13:24
  • For the dark mode and code navigation there is VScode and the wolfram plugins which I find quite enjoyable to use. I do not understand paclets so I can't say anything about that . You can go directly to the definition of a function from anywhere in the code that has the name of the function with the plugin. I wrote a bit about package management in VS code here but I have not had to code anything over 3000 lines – userrandrand Nov 24 '22 at 13:57
18

This Wolfram support article explains how to install the latest Workbench as an Eclipse plugin.

It is compatible with Eclipse 4.6 (Neon) and Mathematica 11.

See also

https://www.wolfram.com/products/workbench/

ilian
  • 25,474
  • 4
  • 117
  • 186
Szabolcs
  • 234,956
  • 30
  • 623
  • 1,263
  • 4
    Now that's an answer! This will be the only form of Workbench going forward, and it is now a free product (no premier service required). I am sure some web pages will still be in need of updating. – ilian Oct 20 '16 at 16:41
  • ... but it does currently not support the Paclet format and is thus more or less useless for serious development, which likely is the reason for having turned to Workbench/Eclipse in the first place. – gwr Nov 24 '22 at 12:48
  • I use the Workbench Eclipse plugin every day and definitely do not consider it useless. The differences between the 'old' and the 'new' paclet format are really cosmetic (in fact the old format will continue working for the foreseeable future) and it is trivial to edit any PacletInfo.xx files by hand as text anyway. – ilian Nov 25 '22 at 04:28