Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Gaby,
|
| On August 23, 2006 6:08 PM you wrote:
| | ... [symbolic computation versus computer algebra]
| | my point is that that distinction is largely an academic
| | exercise in ways we approach the subject matter, and NOT
| | a really deep one
On August 22, 2006 11:10 PM Gabriel Dos Reis
Tim Daly writes:
| Gaby wrote:
|(1) At the moment, Axiom does not look simple to
|build/install despite efforts in that direction;
|
| ummm
|
| export AXIOM=`pwd`/mnt/linux
| make
|
| i can't make it easier.
that is
On August 22, 2006 9:18 PM Gaby wrote:
Bill Page writes:
[...]
| Gaby would like to introduce his students to symbolic
| computation, but really Axiom (and Aldor) are not very
| good at this -- by design.
The appearance of AXIOM in the scientific market moves symbolic
Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On August 22, 2006 9:18 PM Gaby wrote:
|
| Bill Page writes:
|
| [...]
|
| | Gaby would like to introduce his students to symbolic
| | computation, but really Axiom (and Aldor) are not very
| | good at this -- by design.
|
| The appearance
Gaby,
On August 23, 2006 12:13 PM you wrote:
...
Bill Page wrote:
|
| Chudnovsky was not making the distinction between symbolic
| computation and computer algebra that Steven Watt is making
| in the papers that I cited previously. Perhaps Gaby, you were
| also was using symbolic in this
Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Gaby,
|
| On August 23, 2006 12:13 PM you wrote:
| ...
| Bill Page wrote:
| |
| | Chudnovsky was not making the distinction between symbolic
| | computation and computer algebra that Steven Watt is making
| | in the papers that I cited previously.
I agree with Steven Watt (I hope I am not overstating his views.)
I heard about Symbolic Computation vs. Computer Algebra first at the
Dagstuhl seminar http://www.dagstuhl.de/06271/ .
I must say for me I was first a bit puzzled by this distinction, but no
matter how you name the two
On August 23, 2006 2:21 PM Gaby wrote:
|
| Yes, and as a matter of fact, I'm deeply sceptical of your
| previous assertion.
|
| Which assertion?
# Gaby would like to introduce his students to symbolic
# computation, *but really Axiom (and Aldor) are not very
# good at this
Ralf Hemmecke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
| And no matter how strongly typed Axiom will be, it must provide a nice
| way to deal with arbitrary expressions. But it should allow to add
| more and more structure to these expressions as the user understands
| the mathematics behind it.
Yes.
Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On August 23, 2006 2:21 PM Gaby wrote:
| |
| | Yes, and as a matter of fact, I'm deeply sceptical of your
| | previous assertion.
| |
| | Which assertion?
|
|# Gaby would like to introduce his students to symbolic
|# computation, *but
Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
| | Could you explain what you mean by retroactively used to redesign
| | its past foundation?
|
| My understanding of your comments is that people tried to show Axiom
| as competing symbolic computation systems, it fails. Let's try to
| present
Gaby,
On August 23, 2006 4:12 PM you wrote:
...
my point is that that distinction is largely an academic exercise
in ways we approach the subject matter, and NOT a really deep
one (though it may be given substance).
I think you are wrong. I think Steven Watt's paper provides
a very
Bill Page [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Gaby,
|
| On August 23, 2006 4:12 PM you wrote:
|
| ...
| my point is that that distinction is largely an academic exercise
| in ways we approach the subject matter, and NOT a really deep
| one (though it may be given substance).
|
| I think you are
Gaby,
On August 23, 2006 6:08 PM you wrote:
| ... [symbolic computation versus computer algebra]
| my point is that that distinction is largely an academic
| exercise in ways we approach the subject matter, and NOT
| a really deep one (though it may be given substance).
|
| I think you
--- Page, Bill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The reason why I asked: Are Axiom developers and users really
motivated to use this sort of thing? is because no one has
shown very much motivation so far. :( I am beginning to
seriously wonder if investing more time in better tools is
really worth the
C Y [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
| That helps, and being centered at a university also helps - after all,
| in one sense Axiom has very few links to academia in terms of
| sponsering/patronage. Most of us have something else as our primary
| responsibility, so there is less intense, focused
Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For my own courses, I've been preparing materials for using Axiom as my main
vehicle for introducing students to symbolic computation.
So, may I offer you support?
Martin
___
Axiom-developer mailing
Martin Rubey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| For my own courses, I've been preparing materials for using Axiom as my main
| vehicle for introducing students to symbolic computation.
|
| So, may I offer you support?
do you mean you have class
Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Martin Rubey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| For my own courses, I've been preparing materials for using Axiom as my
main
| vehicle for introducing students to symbolic computation.
|
| So, may I
it might be possible to develop course materials using axiom
on various topics and make them available for teaching. --t
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
root [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| it might be possible to develop course materials using axiom
| on various topics and make them available for teaching. --t
I agree in principle -- and that is what I tried to do.
However:
(1) At the moment, Axiom does not look simple to build/install
Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(2) the extension language seems to have a very fuzzy definition,
when compared to other recent versions of CASes.
Particularly, with respect to (2), I have become unimpressed by the Aldor
mic-mac and the sort of self-infliged paralysis we
On 8/22/06, Alfredo Portes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 23 Aug 2006 00:36:39 +0200, Gabriel Dos Reis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree in principle -- and that is what I tried to do.However:(1) At the moment, Axiom does not look simple to build/installdespite efforts in that direction;
Maybe you
Martin Rubey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
| I agree, unfortunately. I'd be very very happy if it would be
| possible to make SPAD understand a greater subset of Aldor. However,
| I have no idea how.
I would like to see those who understand SPAD better than I do attempt
a clearer definition
--- Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For my own courses, I've been preparing materials for using Axiom as
my main vehicle for introducing students to symbolic computation.
Yesterday, I had to reconsider that decision given the many whoops to
jump through and unfavorable impression
--- Gabriel Dos Reis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this course is at a graduate level, and many of the students have
some basic knowledge of data structures, algorithms, programming
languages, generic programming, compilers, etc.
Opps - yes, that would make a difference. For a minute I was back
root [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|(1) At the moment, Axiom does not look simple to build/install
|despite efforts in that direction;
|
| ummm
|
| export AXIOM=`pwd`/mnt/linux
| make
|
| i can't make it easier.
that is one definition of it :-)
-- Gaby
27 matches
Mail list logo
