--- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It strikes that people are trying hard to speculate on Fricas goals > and methods, much more than the originator of the Fricas project :-)
Point - in fact, a very good point. Waldek isn't joining this fray so far, but I'll quote from http://www.math.uni.wroc.pl/~hebisch/fricas/fricas-reg.html "FriCAS will use traditional methodology for new developement and gradually convert other files back to traditional form..." (as opposed to literate form, if I understand his statement correctly.) "FriCAS will use lightweight developement, allowing much faster evolution." That seems to be sufficiently different from Axiom as I have understood it to be defined to merit a separate project. (And is probably a good canditate for a description on the Axiom website.) In my opinion, it is also to lead to a system which will diverge quite rapidly from Axiom's current form. Since Axiom itself will be diverging from its current point (although probably more slowly) compatibility is likely to be a difficult goal to strive for. Particularly if one or both projects start re-examining fundamental design decisions. I have seen no responses to my previous question, which I think defines the issue: are there defining goals of Axiom the project that should result in development in directions incompatible with those goals becoming new projects? Cheers, CY ____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545433 _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
