On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Francois Maltey wrote:
| Dear Gabriel,
|
| If you are looking in the interpreter is it possible to improve axion
| about anonymous functions :
|
| [t+k for k in 1..12] -- is right in axiom
| [(t+->t+k) for k in 1..12] -- I can't get 12 functions with 12 integers.
|
|
Dear Gabriel,
If you are looking in the interpreter is it possible to improve axion
about anonymous functions :
[t+k for k in 1..12] -- is right in axiom
[(t+->t+k) for k in 1..12] -- I can't get 12 functions with 12 integers.
[t +-> t+1, t +-> t+2] -- is well declared, but I
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| > What is the difference between putting that definition in a file
| > and subsequently issueing )co
|
| The interpreter does not have the treewalking machinery to dynamically
| construct and use a category. The compiler does.
(1) But, they are no
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
| Concerning differences, a little one which probably has no useful
| justification: compiler accepts "until" keyword, but this keyword is
| absent in the interpreter.
I believe the interpreter uses the "new parser" (src/interp/cparse.boot)
where "until"
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
> | In Axiom getting a "new" instance of an existing type is easy,
> | you just call the constructor.
>
> I'm sorry, that is bogus argument. Try )compile on a file that has
> category and domain definitions.
>
> | But to create
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
| > On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| >
| > | > The interpreter (in particular pf2Sex) does not handle category
| > | > definitions (with-expression). Is that by design or an "unfinished part"
| > |
| > | I'm not sure that it is possible to c
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> | > The interpreter (in particular pf2Sex) does not handle category
> | > definitions (with-expression). Is that by design or an "unfinished part"
> |
> | I'm not sure that it is possible to create categories at the
> | interpreter level. Well, in
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| > The interpreter (in particular pf2Sex) does not handle category
| > definitions (with-expression). Is that by design or an "unfinished part"
|
| I'm not sure that it is possible to create categories at the
| interpreter level. Well, in theory it is
