Changes http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/ManipulatingExpressions/diff
--
++added:
Other Operations
The domain FunctionSpace includes the following operations::
isExpt(p,f:Symbol) returns [x, n] if p = x**n and n <> 0 and x = f(a)
isExpt(p,op:BasicOperator) returns [x, n] if p = x**n an
On November 6, 2005 4:20 PM Hans Peter Würmli wrote:
>
> I am struggling with dealing with Expressions. For most sake
> and purposes I can find a fix and solve my small problems,
> but I never feel very assured.
>
> Maybe you can give me some pointers. The question that I
> originally would ha
I am struggling with dealing with Expressions. For most sake and purposes I
can find a fix and solve my small problems, but I never feel very assured.
Maybe you can give me some pointers. The question that I originally would have
liked to ask was: is there a "parse tree" object available for e
Axiom Developers;
Recently there have appeared some new Axiom users who seem to prefer to
interact via the Axiom Portal rather than by email or through the Wiki.
Changes and additions to the content on the Axiom Portal are not
automatically forwarded to the axiom-developer list, however registered
mathaction is on the critical path, or so you've convinced me. we
need to get it on the desktop, rework axiom to have a browser front
end, make "drag and drop" programs work. and we need it standalone so
we can get the doyen idea (a bootable liveCD science platform)
demonstrated. doyen exists on s
On November 6, 2005 3:08 PM Tim asked:
>
> so we can look forward to bookvol11 (mathaction)? :-)
>
Yes. At least chapter 1 - the mathaction specific part,
within the next few days. Recently Clifford Yap asked if
it was possible to install MathAction stand alone on the
desktop. I think some decen
so we can look forward to bookvol11 (mathaction)? :-)
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
On November 6, 2005 2:22 PM you Tim Daly wrote:
>
> > > i'm advocating literate programming and have likely committed
> > > the rest of my axiom working life to proving (or disproving)
> > > the concept.
> > >
> >
> > Three cheers! On this we are in complete agreement. I agree
> > 100% with the
> > i'm advocating literate programming and have likely committed
> > the rest of my axiom working life to proving (or disproving)
> > the concept.
> >
>
> Three cheers! On this we are in complete agreement. I agree
> 100% with the emphasis on literate programming - so much so
> that I have a har
Tim
On November 6, 2005 1:16 PM you wrote:
>
> in open source "advocacy is volunteering"
>
> are you volunteering to write the "boot" compiler docs
> and maintain it? can you set it up as a separate language
> so we don't need to bootstrap it? you could write bookvol10
> (boot language).
I agre
in open source "advocacy is volunteering"
are you volunteering to write the "boot" compiler docs
and maintain it? can you set it up as a separate language
so we don't need to bootstrap it? you could write bookvol10
(boot language).
to do that you'll have to figure out what parts of axiom
are only
Dear Tim,
> -Original Message-
> From: root [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 5:43 PM
> To: Weiss, Juergen
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; axiom-developer@nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: Boot vs. Lisp
>
> the first common lisp port of axiom to the ibm/r
Dear Bill,
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Page [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 4:50 PM
> To: Weiss, Juergen
> Cc: axiom-developer@nongnu.org
> Subject: RE: [Axiom-developer] RE: Boot vs. Lisp
>
>
> Of course ANSI lisp includes 'destructuring-bind' and o
On November 6, 2005 11:10 AM Tim Daly wrote
> ...
> boot is NOT a higher level language than lisp. Spad is.
I think boot is a higher level language than lisp.
In my previous email I intended to quote Jergen Weiss'
example of the use of destructing in Boot:
> 4. Destructuring setq and destructur
> > http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/weiss/axiom_cmu.tgz
> >
> > So, couldn't we add CMUCL as a second compiler?
>
> Using the CMU compiler is not a big deal. The tar archive
> you mentioned has, I think, a running (but old) version in it.
> It would not be difficult to fold the changes into the
> c
On November 6, 2005 11:10 AM Tim Daly wrote:
>
> boot subtracts functionality and forces me to code things
> that i know generate code which is a waste of time. do this:
> ...
> we need to modify the boot compiler to rewrite these string
> expressions.
But the fact that Boot does this is entir
On November 6, 2005 10:58 AM Tim Daly wrote:
>
> boot and lisp attack the same problem with different syntax.
> in the same environment, namely the execution environment of
> the interpreter boot loses
>
>backquote
>macros
>structures
>data-program symmetry
>
>
> if we w
Am (marginally) happier. :)
On November 6, 2005 10:50 AM Tim Daly wrote:
>
> intloop () ==
> mode := $intRestart
> while mode = $intRestart repeat
> resetStackLimits()
> mode := CATCH($intTopLevel,
> SpadInterpretStream(1, ["TIM", "DALY", "?"], true))
>
> Lisp:
>
Dear Martin,
I must admit that my practical knowlegde of AXIOM does not
really include code produced by the A# compiler, as it
predates the availability of A#. And as I wrote in my
last mail, I do not have much spare time which I can
spend on AXIOM. So probably I will not be able to
contribute muc
[Ooops, got too excited and hit the wrong key and sent this
prematurely ... please excuse the previous partial email.]
Tim,
I feel rallied by William Sit's support, so here comes another
defensive action.
On November 6, 2005 1:55 AM you wrote:
>
> > First about Boot. My (admittedly poor) under
Dear Martin,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Rubey
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:59 AM
> To: Weiss, Juergen
> Cc: axiom-developer@nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: Boot vs. Lisp
>
> Dear Jürgen, Tim, *
> Since when does any high level language "add functionality"?
> You should not expect it too. Fortran does not add functionality
> to Assembler language. If anything it specifically removes
> functionality, trading-off extreme flexibility for a more
> congenial model of computation. No one could a
> Since when does any high level language "add functionality"?
> You should not expect it too. Fortran does not add functionality
> to Assembler language. If anything it specifically removes
> functionality, trading-off extreme flexibility for a more
> congenial model of computation. No one could a
intloop () ==
mode := $intRestart
while mode = $intRestart repeat
resetStackLimits()
mode := CATCH($intTopLevel,
SpadInterpretStream(1, ["TIM", "DALY", "?"], true))
Lisp:
(defun intloop ()
(do ((mode $intRestart))
((equal mode $intRestart))
(resetStackIn
Tim,
I feel rallied by William Sit's support, so here comes another
defensive action.
On November 6, 2005 1:55 AM you wrote:
>
> > First about Boot. My (admittedly poor) understanding of
> > Boot is that it is an intermedate language between Lisp
> > and Spad (and there are other intermediate
Hi Tim,
I tried to build a new AXIOM from the tla archive. I did an "tla
update ..." on an existing directory and started to compile with "make"
Everything went fine, untill I got a bunch of "... permission
denied..." statements during the build process of teh brouwser. A second
"m
26 matches
Mail list logo
