On Thursday, June 23, 2005 2:35 AM William Sit wrote:
> Bill Page wrote:
>> 2-d editing might be possible if we can use mathML. In that case
>> it is possible to select displayed 2-d sub-expressions, modify them
>> with a few keystrokes (e.g. by typing the corresponding linear 1-d
>> sub-expressi
William Sit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > As I commented above, it is *not* Axiom's job to decide for me
> > > what needs recomputing and what does not.
> >
> > I disagree. To paraphrase what Bob wrote several emails earlier:
> > "Why should it be necessary for me to do something complex
> > like
Bob,
On Thursday, June 23, 2005 2:41 PM you wrote:
>Let me understand this better.
>
> (1) -> f(n)==(free k; k:=k+1; n+k);
> Type: Void
> (2) -> f(1)
> Loading /usr/lib/axiom-20050201/algebra/UPMP.o for package
> UnivariatePolynomialMultiplicationPackag
Let me understand this better.
(1) -> f(n)==(free k; k:=k+1; n+k);
Type: Void
(2) -> f(1)
Loading /usr/lib/axiom-20050201/algebra/UPMP.o for package
UnivariatePolynomialMultiplicationPackage
Compiling function f with t
On Thursday, June 23, 2005 7:29 AM Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> Axiom also allows to do something like that...
> What should the line (6) f(n) return after a user modified
> line (5) to n:=3?
The answer is
(6) 6
Type: PositiveInteger
The way to know for sure
Axiom also allows to do something like that...
What should the line (6) f(n) return after a user modified line (5) to
n:=3? Will f(n) return 6 or 7? And what did the user expect?
Ralf
(1) -> k:=1
(1) 1
Type:
PositiveInteger
(2) -> f(n)
Andrey G. Grozin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I disagree. Only the user can decide *which* consistent state [s]he wants.
> Suppose there is a code fragment
> n:=1
> x:=f(n)
> n:=2
> y:=f(n)
> Do you consider the state of Axiom after it inconsistent? I don't. This is
> an imperative language, after a
"Page, Bill" wrote:
> Of course in this very simple example there is no significant
> difference. But if line (3) happened to involve a very lengthy
> calculation, it would be greatly to our advantage that we can
> simply restore the value that is consistent with what is now
> displayed on the p
Bill:
This is Part III. History, and Lazy Re-evaluation
> >> Should this be a front-end browser function or a back-end Axiom
> >> function. For example a function in Axiom might be able to return
> >> the list of input history numbers of those commands that need to
> >> be re-executed.
> >
> > Th
Bill:
To avoid really long messages and also to focus on issues separately, I'll
answer yours in several less long ones.
This is Part I: hyperdoc evaluations
"Page, Bill" wrote:
> [information on lazy-evaluation, delayed-evaluation, lazy-re-evaluation
snipped]
Many thanks for a quick e
Bill:
This is Part IV: History, 2D editing
> [comments on using )history snipped]
>
> > What is desirable in the interpreter interface, is the ability to
> > edit previous input lines in a 2D way. Mathematica allows it and
> > makes it very easy to do quick exploratory computations during the
Bill:
This is Part II. Re-evaluation (focusing on what needs to be recomputed) and bad
2D editing in Maple
> Re-evaluation is a little different. It involves a
> series of operations (transactions) which have already altered the
> state of the program, i.e. a series of updates. Like this:
>
>
On Thursday, June 23, 2005 12:51 AM I wrote:
> ...
> So Axiom only has to do the following:
>
> (1') -> n:=3
>
>(1) 3
> Type: PositiveInteger
> (2') -> x:=f(n)
>
>(2) f(3)
> Type: Expression Integer
> (3'
On Wednesday, June 22, 2005 11:55 PM Andrey G. Grozin wrote:
> ...
> Only the user can decide *which* consistent state [s]he wants.
> Suppose there is a code fragment:
>
> (1) n:=1
> (2) x:=f(n)
> (3) n:=2
> (4) y:=f(n)
>
> Do you consider the state of Axiom after it inconsistent?
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005, Page, Bill wrote:
> > This is unreasonable. The purpose to edit earlier input lines may
> > also rearrange the order of execution of the lines. Only the user
> > knows what order of execution is needed for his/her purpose.
> I disagree. Given Axiom's history of the commands tha
First let me give a simple definition of lazy re-evaluation. Imagine a
worksheet interface, that when read from top to bottom, is *always*
consistent. In Maple and Mathematica the user must remember what he has
executed, and keep much information about the kernel's state in his/her
head. It is v
William,
I am sorry that this is a rather long email, but I think this is
an important subject that has not yet been properly dealt with
in any computer algebra system.
> Bill Page wrote:
>> ... both Tim Daly and William Sit assure me that the old Axiom
>> Hypertex browser already implements this
"Page, Bill" wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2005 5:05 PM Bob McElrath
>
> > Kai Oliver Kaminski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> What kind of dependency tracking would you need? Just within a
> >> single page? For multiple pages? Send me use cases, tell me what
> >> you need.
> >
> >I've been think
On Tuesday, June 21, 2005 5:05 PM Bob McElrath
> Kai Oliver Kaminski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> What kind of dependency tracking would you need? Just within a
>> single page? For multiple pages? Send me use cases, tell me what
>> you need.
>
>I've been thinking about this a lot lately.
Although
19 matches
Mail list logo
