Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, Alasdair McAndrew wrote: It may be that the negative views of Axiom are simply due to Axiom being very poorly (read "not at all") marketed - there are no elementary books about the use of Axiom, and if you go to the Axiom website, it is hard to find introductory beginner's or

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: | | --- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | | > On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: | > | > [...] | > | > | > Currently, Axiom isn't. But if its proponents are convinced that | > | > they do should their best to chase away "novices", then the | > system i

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

--- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: > > [...] > > | > Currently, Axiom isn't. But if its proponents are convinced that > | > they do should their best to chase away "novices", then the > system is > | > doomed to premature death. > | > | I don't s

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: [...] | > Currently, Axiom isn't. But if its proponents are convinced that | > they do should their best to chase away "novices", then the system is | > doomed to premature death. | | I don't see that we are chasing away novices - we ARE setting goals | that are

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, Stephen Wilson wrote: [...] | How does noticing this help the situation? Are new users more likely | to join in and help improve the project when they get the impression | that the system `just works'? On first order, yes. I look at other systems, such as GCC, linux, GDB,

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

--- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > for many, that is not a practical difference -- since they are > already using commercial systems. For many, yes. If functionality is all that is important and the budget is there, commercial systems are the current obvious choice - that's why t

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

Hi Bill, Just trying in these posts to get a few concrete suggestions on how the problems raised can be solved. [...] > ... the majority of the new Axiom users would seem to prefer to be > able to use Axiom in essentially the same way as if it were a > commercial product. If it doesn't work rath

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

--- Bill Page <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I do not agree that open source is a completely "different ballgame". > As Tim has explained even when Axiom was a research project at IBM is > was quite freely given out to those researchers who had a real > interest in it. Well, I can't speak for othe

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

Hello Gaby, Is it your contention that Axiom should be more devoted to the perpetual task of meeting the common consensus on what qualifies as `state of the art', as opposed to the perpetual task of trying to redefine the meaning of the term? I can understand that having a CAS today which working

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: | | --- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | | > On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: | > | > | Sure, as a commercial product. Open source is a different | > | ballgame; | > | > What are the concrete differences? | | For one thing, there is no legal proble

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

--- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: > > | Sure, as a commercial product. Open source is a different > | ballgame; > > What are the concrete differences? For one thing, there is no legal problem with fixing problems yourself and distributing the re

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, Bill Page wrote: | I think you are wrong. You should take a very close look at the large | number of developers in the Sage project and the kind of (mostly | leading edge) things they are doing. This is a very good point. I'm very impressed by the diligence with which peopl

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On 7/29/07, C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: > > > > | Um. I can understand the lack of seamless integration, but why > > | would Axiom's history cause a negative reaction? > > > > Well, this is something one s

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: | Sure, as a commercial product. Open source is a different ballgame; What are the concrete differences? The algorithms have not gotten better, for example. The documentation is no really better than what they had before; windows support is worse. [...] | > |

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

--- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: > > | Um. I can understand the lack of seamless integration, but why > | would Axiom's history cause a negative reaction? > > Well, this is something one should oneself ask directly to the > interested people. D

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, C Y wrote: | Um. I can understand the lack of seamless integration, but why would | Axiom's history cause a negative reaction? Well, this is something one should oneself ask directly to the interested people. Do you believe Axiom's history is not a factor to Tim's committme

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, Alasdair McAndrew wrote: | Another problem - which I see as major - is that there is no native | windows version with documentation (HyperDoc) and graphics. I agree. -- Gaby ___ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007, Alasdair McAndrew wrote: | It may be that the negative views of Axiom are simply due to Axiom | being very poorly (read "not at all") marketed - there are no | elementary books about the use of Axiom, and if you go to the Axiom | website, it is hard to find introductory beginn

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

--- Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > [...] > > | Axiom has the opportunity to be the base of computational > mathematics. > > When it manages to meet the needs of the working computational > mathematicians. It cannot do that by building self-made ghe

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

It may be that the negative views of Axiom are simply due to Axiom being very poorly (read "not at all") marketed - there are no elementary books about the use of Axiom, and if you go to the Axiom website, it is hard to find introductory beginner's or tutorial articles. Contrast this last with Max

Re: [Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [...] | Axiom has the opportunity to be the base of computational mathematics. When it manages to meet the needs of the working computational mathematicians. It cannot do that by building self-made ghetto with an autistic attitute of the workers. I have spoken to many

[Axiom-developer] literate programming and Claerbout's Insight

>From Buckheit, Jonathan B., Donoho, David L. "WaveLab and Reproducible Research" Jon Claerbout's Insight An Article about computational science in a scientific publication is not the scholarship itself, it is merely advertising