--- William Sit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> C Y wrote:
> > I'm just saying that in an open source project discussion without
> > code ultimately goes nowhere. I don't think that's a danger here,
> > but it has been known to effectively kill projects in the past.
>
> Is that (projects getting
C Y wrote:
> I'm
> just saying that in an open source project discussion without code
> ultimately goes nowhere. I don't think that's a danger here, but it
> has been known to effectively kill projects in the past.
Is that (projects getting killed) necessarily bad?
> > The running of Spad depend
--- William Sit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> C Y wrote:
> > I think it is more like "if there are two firmly opposed points of
> > view in a debate, if only one person is willing to put the coding
> > time behind their ideas then they win the argument by default."
> > Or perhaps "only ideas wit
C Y wrote:
>
> --- William Sit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Bill Page wrote:
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > > On November 6, 2005 1:16 PM you wrote:
> > > >
> > > > in open source "advocacy is volunteering"
> > [snipped]
> > > I agree that "advocacy is volunteering" ...
> >
> > Well, I don't! To
Martin Rubey wrote:
>
> William Sit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > What we need is a development kit with tools to set breaks and examine Axiom
> > variables, displayed in mathematical notations, not Lisp data structures
> > down to
> > the nitty gritty.
>
> You do know about
>
> )trace C
--- William Sit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Page wrote:
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > On November 6, 2005 1:16 PM you wrote:
> > >
> > > in open source "advocacy is volunteering"
> [snipped]
> > I agree that "advocacy is volunteering" ...
>
> Well, I don't! To have that as the defacto working pr
William Sit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> What we need is a development kit with tools to set breaks and examine Axiom
> variables, displayed in mathematical notations, not Lisp data structures down
> to
> the nitty gritty.
You do know about
)trace COMBF )math
(does not work with EXPR, unfort
Bill Page wrote:
>
> Tim
>
> On November 6, 2005 1:16 PM you wrote:
> >
> > in open source "advocacy is volunteering"
[snipped]
> I agree that "advocacy is volunteering" ...
Well, I don't! To have that as the defacto working principle is to discourage
people from commenting or advocating. All w
root wrote:
> boot subtracts functionality and forces me to code things that
> i know generate code which is a waste of time. do this:
>
> cd int/interp
> fgrep MAKESTRING *
>
> see all those calls to MAKESTRING? lets investigate. each call looks like:
>
> (MAKESTRING "a string")
>
> so w
Bill Page wrote:
>
> Am (marginally) happier. :)
>
> On November 6, 2005 10:50 AM Tim Daly wrote:
> >
> > intloop () ==
> > mode := $intRestart
> > while mode = $intRestart repeat
> > resetStackLimits()
> > mode := CATCH($intTopLevel,
> > SpadInterpretStream(1, [
root wrote:
> sorry, but you are reasoning by wrong analogy.
>
Let me try another analogy. Ever use MS Word to generate an html page and look
at how inefficient the generated html source is? Well, I hate that every time I
see such html code, and I myself never used that: I hand code html pages u
mathaction is on the critical path, or so you've convinced me. we
need to get it on the desktop, rework axiom to have a browser front
end, make "drag and drop" programs work. and we need it standalone so
we can get the doyen idea (a bootable liveCD science platform)
demonstrated. doyen exists on s
On November 6, 2005 3:08 PM Tim asked:
>
> so we can look forward to bookvol11 (mathaction)? :-)
>
Yes. At least chapter 1 - the mathaction specific part,
within the next few days. Recently Clifford Yap asked if
it was possible to install MathAction stand alone on the
desktop. I think some decen
so we can look forward to bookvol11 (mathaction)? :-)
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
On November 6, 2005 2:22 PM you Tim Daly wrote:
>
> > > i'm advocating literate programming and have likely committed
> > > the rest of my axiom working life to proving (or disproving)
> > > the concept.
> > >
> >
> > Three cheers! On this we are in complete agreement. I agree
> > 100% with the
> > i'm advocating literate programming and have likely committed
> > the rest of my axiom working life to proving (or disproving)
> > the concept.
> >
>
> Three cheers! On this we are in complete agreement. I agree
> 100% with the emphasis on literate programming - so much so
> that I have a har
Tim
On November 6, 2005 1:16 PM you wrote:
>
> in open source "advocacy is volunteering"
>
> are you volunteering to write the "boot" compiler docs
> and maintain it? can you set it up as a separate language
> so we don't need to bootstrap it? you could write bookvol10
> (boot language).
I agre
in open source "advocacy is volunteering"
are you volunteering to write the "boot" compiler docs
and maintain it? can you set it up as a separate language
so we don't need to bootstrap it? you could write bookvol10
(boot language).
to do that you'll have to figure out what parts of axiom
are only
On November 6, 2005 11:10 AM Tim Daly wrote
> ...
> boot is NOT a higher level language than lisp. Spad is.
I think boot is a higher level language than lisp.
In my previous email I intended to quote Jergen Weiss'
example of the use of destructing in Boot:
> 4. Destructuring setq and destructur
On November 6, 2005 11:10 AM Tim Daly wrote:
>
> boot subtracts functionality and forces me to code things
> that i know generate code which is a waste of time. do this:
> ...
> we need to modify the boot compiler to rewrite these string
> expressions.
But the fact that Boot does this is entir
On November 6, 2005 10:58 AM Tim Daly wrote:
>
> boot and lisp attack the same problem with different syntax.
> in the same environment, namely the execution environment of
> the interpreter boot loses
>
>backquote
>macros
>structures
>data-program symmetry
>
>
> if we w
Am (marginally) happier. :)
On November 6, 2005 10:50 AM Tim Daly wrote:
>
> intloop () ==
> mode := $intRestart
> while mode = $intRestart repeat
> resetStackLimits()
> mode := CATCH($intTopLevel,
> SpadInterpretStream(1, ["TIM", "DALY", "?"], true))
>
> Lisp:
>
[Ooops, got too excited and hit the wrong key and sent this
prematurely ... please excuse the previous partial email.]
Tim,
I feel rallied by William Sit's support, so here comes another
defensive action.
On November 6, 2005 1:55 AM you wrote:
>
> > First about Boot. My (admittedly poor) under
> Since when does any high level language "add functionality"?
> You should not expect it too. Fortran does not add functionality
> to Assembler language. If anything it specifically removes
> functionality, trading-off extreme flexibility for a more
> congenial model of computation. No one could a
> Since when does any high level language "add functionality"?
> You should not expect it too. Fortran does not add functionality
> to Assembler language. If anything it specifically removes
> functionality, trading-off extreme flexibility for a more
> congenial model of computation. No one could a
intloop () ==
mode := $intRestart
while mode = $intRestart repeat
resetStackLimits()
mode := CATCH($intTopLevel,
SpadInterpretStream(1, ["TIM", "DALY", "?"], true))
Lisp:
(defun intloop ()
(do ((mode $intRestart))
((equal mode $intRestart))
(resetStackIn
Tim,
I feel rallied by William Sit's support, so here comes another
defensive action.
On November 6, 2005 1:55 AM you wrote:
>
> > First about Boot. My (admittedly poor) understanding of
> > Boot is that it is an intermedate language between Lisp
> > and Spad (and there are other intermediate
> First about Boot. My (admittedly poor) understanding of Boot is that it is an
> intermedate language between Lisp and Spad (and there are other intermediate
> languages Shoe, Meta, etc as well). I agree that to build a truely high level
> language like Spad/Axiom/Aldor, intermediate languages are
Dear Bill:
I have been staying on the sideline (since I don't know much about Boot or Lisp)
on this "war", but I am more convinced by your arguments than by Tim's or
Morrison's, and I felt that I should be a late ally before you surrender!
First about Boot. My (admittedly poor) understanding of B
> I think it would be really cool to port Axiom from 'noweb' to a TeXmacs
> based literate programming system of some kind. There is at least one
> person on the TeXmacs users and/or development mailing list who has
> mentioned this idea in the past. Since TeXmacs keeps the document in a
> tree f
> I think it would be really cool to port Axiom from 'noweb' to a TeXmacs
> based literate programming system of some kind. There is at least one
> person on the TeXmacs users and/or development mailing list who has
> mentioned this idea in the past. Since TeXmacs keeps the document in a
> tree f
> I think it would be really cool to port Axiom from 'noweb' to a TeXmacs
> based literate programming system of some kind. There is at least one
> person on the TeXmacs users and/or development mailing list who has
> mentioned this idea in the past. Since TeXmacs keeps the document in a
> tree f
On Thu, 2005-11-03 at 22:16 -0500, Bill Page wrote:
> And if by "knowing lisp" you mean knowing the concepts on which lisp
> is based, then I would be surprised to find many undergraduate
> computer science students who did not have at least one
> programming course which included at least an intro
33 matches
Mail list logo
