On November 22, 2005 3:38 PM Peter Broadbery wrote:
> Bill Page wrote:
> >
> > Yet the ability to use 'pretend' is critical to the concept
> > of representation in the construction of Axiom domains.
> >
> > For a perhaps overly abstract discussion of this see:
> >
> > http://wiki.axiom-develope
But, but, ... he sputters ...
I thought Axiom was supposed to be a system for mathematicians,
or at least a system to do mathematics by computer. From that
point of view there is barely a telescope long enough to hide
the dirty details of the entrails of the computer. ;)
On November 22, 2005 5:13
--- root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ultimately i think the issue comes down to this: i'm a
> primitivist by nature and expect programmers, like myself, to
> know EXACTLY what the machine will execute when i use high
> level languages like spad, lisp, or haskell. (and to send
> email by tapping
Chuck Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is at the University of Melbourne.
Being an american by training I have no idea where that is but it's certainly
"down under".
t
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailma
Hi Bill.
| Seriously, I have no objections to the suggested location.
It would certainly make a change to have something like this away from
the traditional haunts of the computer algebra community ie the North
Atlantic fringe.
Bear in mind that a flight to Austalia from those parts of the worl
ultimately i think the issue comes down to this: i'm a primitivist
by nature and expect programmers, like myself, to know EXACTLY what
the machine will execute when i use high level languages like spad,
lisp, or haskell. (and to send email by tapping on the correct wire pair
in an ethernet cable wi
On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 14:27 -0500, Bill Page wrote:
> On November 21, 2005 12:59 PM Gaby wrote:
>
> >
> > "Bill Page" writes:
> >
> > | On November 20, 2005 11:50 PM Gaby wrote:
> > | > |
> > | > | We have mentioned before on this list the very good article
> > | > |
> > | > | http://en.wikipe
Tim,
When I read through your email I have to admit that I felt a
little depressed. I hope I don't sound too "condescending" by
saying this, but I felt like your email moves the discussion
of types in Axiom backwards to nearly "high school programming"
levels, not even computer science 101... :(
Hello,
C Y wrote:
--- Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think of B# as first of all generalizing 'Expression' so that
all of the computations that a user is likely to want to do can
be done entirely within that one domain - just as if they were
calculating using Maple or Mathematica. And
The example
> (1) -> I:Integer
> Type: Void
> (2) -> F:Float:=1.0
>
>(2) 1.0
> Type: Float
> (3) -> I := F pretend Integer
>
>(3) 1()
'pretend' is only for system-internal use. it basicall
10 matches
Mail list logo
