
From:  M. Edward (Ed) Borasky 
Subject:  Re: [Axiomdeveloper] Lisp 
Date:  Thu, 06 Mar 2008 18:59:26 0800 
Useragent:  Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080213) 
Waldek Hebisch wrote:
Bill Page wrote:On 3/5/08, Waldek Hebisch wrote:I agree to the general statement: there are many problems that Axiom can not do  most beginers will probably give up concluding "Axiom is too hard to use" and not realize that what they want to do in not doable using Axiom.I think you need to define more carefully what you mean by "axiom just can't do many things mathematicians want to do" and "not doable usingAxiom".I would say that from beginers point of view doable means using 23 commands. "Interpreter" functions are a middle ground. Going to Spad is more like "writing program to solve the problem" than "using Axiom".
Exactly! I do a lot with queuing theory, Petri nets, and (timed) process algebras. While there are a number of special purpose packages for this domain, only one of them is open source, and that one is primarily numeric. I don't want to have to teach a CAS to do Laplace transforms, handle block matrices with a countably infinite number of rows and columns, etc. I don't know how theoretical mathematicians feel about this, but I for one don't have any use for a CAS that can't do these things.
Where *I* want to spend my programming time is getting these "abstract" solutions into some form that can be used by people other than fellow mathematicians.
[Prev in Thread]  Current Thread  [Next in Thread] 