Re: [Axiom-developer] Axiom and the scientific commnunauty

[David MENTRE]

Hello Daniel,

While Tim has sent a lengthy reply, I would like to add a few words.


Daniel AUGOT <address@hidden> writes:

>   Consequently, I think there must be a thinking about the state of
>   Axiom, and clear signs concerning its future, beyond the point of
>   making it publicly available. Will the compiler will be fixed ?

The (Aldor, A#, ...) compiler has never been released as free software.

> Will it be documented ?

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: Tim (and other people like me) believe that the long term
viability of Axiom relies on its internal documentation. So all Axiom
source code is available in a pamphlet form, which is essentially latex
+ source code. Currently, only the build process is documented.

For internal documentation, look for .dvi files in a compiled Axiom
tree.

For long term design, see for example:
http://mail.nongnu.org/archive/html/axiom-developer/2003-08/msg00071.html 

> Will compiled code be faster ?

I can't say. Right now, Axiom speed relies on GCL (Gnu Common Lisp)
speed. If you are thinking of a native Axiom compiler, i.e. from Spad to
assembly, it needs to be designed and implemented from scratch.

> Will researchers in computer algebra be able to incorporate easily
> their software ?

This is a goal. Tim wants people to be able to do a drag&drop of new
Axiom packages, with automatic dependency handling, automatic internal
and user documentation generation, etc.

> Will they be able to redesign the system of categories ?

I can't say.

> Will it be possible to link against efficient C code ?

Why not? Axiom's Spad compiles to common lisp which compiles to C. It
should be possible to insert some proper linking at the right stage with
foreign C code. Of course, obvious issues like interaction with lisp's
garbage collector should be handled correctly.

If this is a requirement, please fill a bug report as "feature request"
in Bug group on savannah web site, with the maximum information you can
provide: expected user interface, expected behavior, example of syntax,
expected interaction with Axiom typing, etc.

http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?func=addbug&group=axiom

>   May be the benefits of the free software will show up, but, after
>   discussion with friends, it will not be enough for switching back to
>   Axiom.

<religious>
Contrary to what Tim thinks, I personally think that free software in
itself is enough to switch to Axiom (or any free CAS). Because the
future of any free software is in the hands of its users. If you want a
feature, do not wait for it, just design and implement it. You have the
right to do it. Axiom is a bit old on certain aspects but it has some
well designed grounds. 

The future of Axiom is in _your_ hands. If you want a certain feature,
code it or find a another colleague, friend, student, ... to do it. 

Free software is much more viable in the long term that any commercialy
supported and closed software. Of course, it remains to us to show that
Axiom will be there in 30 years. There's no such thing as a simple
job. ;) 
</religious>

Yours,
d.
-- 
 address@hidden