>I am sorry, but changing variable names inside source code because of >a project fork seems incorrect to me. I think it would be both wrong >and even more confusing if FriCAS and OpenAxiom tried to give the >impression that they had no relation to each other and no relation at >all to the original Axiom project when they still share between 75% to >90% of the same code, the user languages are nearly (but not exactly) >identical and for the most part they produce the same results.
Most common lisps share a large percentage of the CMUCL code because most of the source code is common lisp and other lisps just copy it. Indeed, SBCL shares 90% of the CMUCL code, including low level code since it is a fork. Considering they all implement the same standard, all the common lisps have identical results. SBCL never posts code or results and uses the name "CMUCL". GCL never posts code or results under the CMUCL name. CLISP never posts code or results under the CMUCL name. As for the 75% to 90% of the code being shared, you'll notice that Boot no longer exists in Axiom. I have hand-authored most of the replacement code and expect it all to be rewritten by the end of the year. So I've written tens of thousands of lines of code that is not shared. A large portion of the code in the interpreter (Volume 5) and the compiler (Volume 9) is code I rewrote from the Boot version. Even the algebra syntax is not shared anymore. Waldek changed the meaning of primitives like ^, symbol-creation, etc. Code from one system will not even parse in the other. Code you wrote on that page won't run in Axiom. It is "wrong and confusing" to use the name Axiom when it is not Axiom. Please stop. Tim _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
