On Tuesday, February 14, 2006 9:53 PM I wrote:
>
> I am also trying to build Axiom from the September 2005 tarball:
>
> http://axiom.axiom-developer.org/axiom-website/DOWNLOADS/axiom
> -Sept2005-src.tgz
>
> on Solaris 8 sparc (280R dual cpu) system. If I simply follow
> the instructions of:
>
On Wednesday, February 15, 2006 12:12 AM Jay Belanger wrote:
>
> Bill Page writes:
> ...
> >> Hmm. But aren't there some cases where you want this, like
> >> (say) knowing that 4 is a real integer without having to
> >> explicitly say that? (Sorry that's probably a dumb question).
> >
> > The phr
On Wednesday, February 15, 2006 12:15 AM Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> Bill Page writes:
> |
> | ./configure
> |
> | You must set your AXIOM and PATH variables. Type:
> |
> | To build the rest of the system type:
> |
> | export AXIOM=/export/disk0/dmprod/axiom/mnt/solaris9
> | export PATH=$AXIOM
"Page, Bill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Tuesday, February 14, 2006 7:05 AM Gianluca Gregori wrote:
| >
| > I am trying to compile axiom on a sparc solaris machine but
| > having lots of trouble (not to experienced as well).
| > I was able to compile gcl-2.6.7 with the --enable-custreloc
| >
"Bill Page" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
>> Hmm. But aren't there some cases where you want this, like
>> (say) knowing that 4 is a real integer without having to
>> explicitly say that? (Sorry that's probably a dumb question).
>
> The phrase "real integer" is kind of dumb ... :) What other ki
Changes http://wiki.axiom-developer.org/MutualRecursion/diff
--
??changed:
-\begin{axiom}
\begin{spad}
??changed:
-\end{axiom}
\end{spad}
??changed:
-\begin{axiom}
\begin{spad}
??changed:
-\end{axiom}
\end{spad}
??changed:
-\begin{axiom}
\begin{spad}
??changed:
-\end{axiom}
\end{spad}
??chan
Martin
Thank you for your responses. I am simply nosing around seeing if I
can understand and solve the problem that I stated earlier in:
SandBox Shortcoming
(Which is totally a wrong title.)
I have no idea whether whether the problem would be solved in time. I
did let it run for
On Tuesday, February 14, 2006 7:05 AM Gianluca Gregori wrote:
>
> I am trying to compile axiom on a sparc solaris machine but
> having lots of trouble (not to experienced as well).
> I was able to compile gcl-2.6.7 with the --enable-custreloc
> option (bfd did not compile). However, still axiom do
The missing symbols, like "open_server" and "sock_get_int"
are in C code that is part of the axiom distribution. "sock_get_int"
lives in src/lib/sockio-c.c.pamphlet
If you look at src/lib/Makefile you'll see that the goal is to create
the library libspad.a
This library is linked with the GCL imag
--- root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Agreed. Am I correct that the logical starting point is to
> > identify where the compiler ends and the math begins (whether it
> > is set/category theory or Axiom's domain and cagetory
> > implementation or whatever) and get the core parts documented
> >
> Agreed. Am I correct that the logical starting point is to identify
> where the compiler ends and the math begins (whether it is set/category
> theory or Axiom's domain and cagetory implementation or whatever) and
> get the core parts documented and working on top of Aldor?
The logical starting
On Tuesday, February 14, 2006 7:14 AM Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
>
> Can someone explain that ...
>
> (2) -> )abbr domain XYZ
> domain must be followed by an alternating list of abbreviation(s)
>and name(s). Issue )abbrev? for more information.
> (2) -> )abbrev?
> Your argument list is
)abbrev domain MYINT MyInteger
^^ domain name
abbreviation
see any pamphlet file in src/algebra
Tim
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axi
Hello,
I am trying to compile axiom on a sparc solaris machine but
having lots of trouble (not to experienced as well).
I was able to compile gcl-2.6.7 with the --enable-custreloc
option (bfd did not compile). However, still axiom does not
compile properly.
Any help is appreciated. --Thanks, Gianl
I've long believed (and even did thesis work) that interval arithmetic
is the best way to implement provisos. For purely arithmetic results
it can generate interesting results. For symbolic results the answers
are even more interesting.
Frink played with interval arithmetic and got some interesti
--- Ralf Hemmecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Cliff,
>
> > Agreed. Am I correct that the logical starting point is to
> > identify where the compiler ends and the math begins (whether
> > it is set/category theory or Axiom's domain and cagetory
> > implementation or whatever) and get the co
>> SCM: Do you happen to remember what you wrote 20 years ago? :)Well, not really.I do remember that I never liked SubDomain. We had all kinds of special-case code to deal with it, and it was only used for NonNegativeInteger and PositiveInteger. I believe the original motivation for sub-domains w
Hi Cliff,
Agreed. Am I correct that the logical starting point is to identify
where the compiler ends and the math begins (whether it is set/category
theory or Axiom's domain and cagetory implementation or whatever) and
get the core parts documented and working on top of Aldor?
Yes, I think t
--- Ralf Hemmecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> How do we resolve things like Aldor's libalgebra vs. Axiom's
> >> libraries?
>
> > I would propose that we forget about Aldor's native libraries for
> > now (as nice, though limited, as they are).
>
> If I knew where to hook libaldor into Axiom,
Hello Laurentiu, hi Stephen,
www.aldor.org is down again also cvs access does not work.
Ralf
On 02/14/2006 12:13 AM, C Y wrote:
--- Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But from my perspective (which may or may not be accurate) we are
being hindered by the uncertainty surrounding SPAD vs. Ald
C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Hmm. But aren't there some cases where you want this, like
> > > (say) knowing that 4 is a real integer without having to
> > > explicitly say that? (Sorry that's probably a dumb question).
> >
> > The phrase "real integer" is kind of dumb ... :) What other
How do we resolve things like Aldor's libalgebra vs. Axiom's
libraries?
I would propose that we forget about Aldor's native libraries for
now (as nice, though limited, as they are).
If I knew where to hook libaldor into Axiom, I would already have done
so. But libaldor basically starts from
If I'm understanding correctly, most of what we would like to
use from Aldor actually is available in source code form, with
the BSD+extra rights for Aldor.org license?
I am not so sure about, the libalgebra sources. Though I have access to
them, I have never seen them distributed from aldor.or
Can someone explain that ...
(2) -> )abbr domain XYZ
domain must be followed by an alternating list of abbreviation(s)
and name(s). Issue )abbrev? for more information.
(2) -> )abbrev?
Your argument list is not valid.
Very helpful! ;-)
Ralf
___
Hmm. But aren't there some cases where you want this, like
(say) knowing that 4 is a real integer without having to
explicitly say that? (Sorry that's probably a dumb question).
The phrase "real integer" is kind of dumb ... :) What other kinds
of integers are there? But the symbol 4 can certain
I can't help wondering if the material in the Reference section of the
Aldor Users Guide might be enough for us to define at least a basic
Aldor compiler in Lisp, and build on that.
I am strongly against writing a new compiler. That is too much effort.
And the compiler also falls under the APL1
26 matches
Mail list logo
