Re: [Axiom-developer] Project directions

[Ralf Hemmecke]

Hello,

On 07/27/2007 11:46 PM, C Y wrote:
> I'll make one more stab at asking my question, using a more concrete
> illustration this time.
>
> Gaby's slides reminded me of the ongoing Lisp vs. Boot situation we
> have in the Axiom project - there are two camps both firmly committed
> to Lisp or Boot respectively.
>
> Unlike the question of literate programming tools, this is fundamental
> - pursuing both goals at the same time in the same project is
> nonsensical.  Both camps appear to be willing to do the work, but at
> some point if work on both directions continues there will be a
> collision between the two.

Why does everyone see collisions? We should aim for a modular Axiom,
  compiler
  interpreter
  runtime system
  algebra libraries
  user interface
  etc.

with a clear specification it doesn't matter whether the compiler is 
written in Boot, SPAD, LISP, or C or Haskell. The compiler should be 
called if needed. Why would the language it is written in matter?

Similar for the interpreter or runtime system, etc.

Why cannot that all live under the hat of "Axiom"? Some people like to 
have a compiler in LISP, some in BOOT. Those people don't agree, which 
will probably lead to two compilers that do the same thing. It is only 
inportant that the specification is clear. Would it be bad to have two 
compilers? Three?

Clearly, if people don't agree on one language that splits developers, 
but the goal is to provides a mathematical and intuitive user interface 
that is supported by a typed programming language. We all work to that 
goal don't we? There is no need to fork again just because some people 
like LISP and some don't. The common goal lives some levels up.

Collaboration, not separation.

Ralf