RE: [Axiom-developer] opinion

[C Y]

--- Mike Thomas <address@hidden> wrote:

> My personal opinion is that there is nothing inherently difficult
> about Windows programming compared with Unix.
> 
> For projects like Axiom, Maxima, GRASS, GCL, CMUCL etc in which the
> software has roots in the Unix/X11 world, it is the conversion of 
> those projects onto the different Windows (or the old MacOS) model 
> which is tricky.

That's true, of course.  I hadn't considered it, but I guess going from
Windows to *nix is just as tough.  (More so, if you consider the
multitude of toolkits to choose from.)  I know CMUCL ports have been
tried and it tends to make developers back away slowly looking rather
pale.

> Catching up with many person years of (often formerly publicly or
> commercially funded) development on Unix written with older software
> engineering practices is a major contributing factor, not to mention
> the esoteric world of Common Lisp in those cases we are discussing 
> here.  (I personally reckon that the GCL C and Maxima Lisp source 
> trees are the most unreadable I have ever seen. Axiom source (not 
> the Latex pamphlets which are horrible for programming purposes) I 
> find very readable on the other hand.)

Heh - I doubt you are alone in your opinion of Maxima's code base.  I
think one of our major efforts in the future will have to be a
reorganization and documentation of our lisp code - probably we will
never achieve literate programming the way Axiom is, but since Maxima
has a different focus it is somewhat less essential that we do.  I
always thought of this as Maxima being the "quick implimentation"
platform, looking for practical results, and Axiom as the "take your
time and do it right" platform.  Both are helped by well documented
code, but in Axiom's case it is more than a help - it is absolutely
essential to the project goals.  (I know it's off topic, but I still
hope at some point to break Maxima up into packages, use Albert to
create some programmer documentation, and generally de-mysterify the
lisp code.  Not quite up to Axiom's level, but certainly better than
where we are now.)

> An excellent example of the difficulty of crossing the programming
> paradigm boundary in the opposite direction is the trend of bringing
> music production software into the Linux/*BSD arena - a slow and 
> difficult process on those platforms in a field traditionally 
> dominated by MacOS, Windows and Atari TOS.  The Agnula/DeMuDi people 
> are doing a great job with great progress but lag behind the 
> software offered on Windows/Mac.

Come to think of it, even Virtualdub has not (as far as I know) been
ported to Linux, despite being useful, popular and open source. 
 
> | and b) very
> | frustrating.  People like Mike and David have a very special 
> skill set
> | that is difficult to duplicate and takes a special kind of
> devotion.
> 
> (We're actually "on a mission from God" - note the quotes before
> taking this seriously.)

Another Jake and Elwood fan? :-)

> This variety is similar to Linux/*BSD/Solaris/IRIX/GNU library and
> tool versions I believe.

Good point.  I guess usually only Linux and occasionally *BSD get
attention, realistically.

> | So Windows developers are rare as a
> | percentage of all Windows users, free software Windows developers
> | are rarer still, and the intersecting set of Windows free software
> | developers interested in CAS work is downright tiny.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> There is also a strangely branched attitude around on both sides 
> of the software divide which says "You Windows free software 
> developers are [in some sad way ethically unclean (this from the 
> Linux world) | stupid for doing free work (from the 
> Windows/Solaris/IRIX side where _all_ programmers
> I meet are commercial programmers)]."

Yep.  Slashdot resonates with this divide, unfortunately.

> I encountered the first attitude in person face to face from one of
> the leading lights in the free software community (the only open
> source developer I ever met in person) and the latter from almost
> every programning colleague I have ever worked with.

Sorry you had to run into that :-/.  I tend to take a "live and let
live" approach to such things.  If people want to develop commercial
software, great.  I only get annoyed when they complain about people
developing competing tools for free.  I do have the opinion that if you
can't produce a product commercially that is enough better than a free
option to inspire people to pay you then have no inherant "right" to
make a profit or (by whatever method) eliminate the free competition,
but that's another debate altogether.
 
> | Eeep.  Now that I thought that out, I'll take this moment to say -
> | THANK YOU, Windows developers!  And thank you Tim Daly (and Bill
> | Schelter) for making all this possible in the first place.
> 
> Thanks Cliff.

:-).

CY


                
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Make Yahoo! your home page 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs