[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Axiom-developer] [fricas-devel] Re: trademarks

From: u1204
Subject: Re: [Axiom-developer] [fricas-devel] Re: trademarks
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:42:31 -0400

>I am sorry, but changing variable names inside source code because of
>a project fork seems incorrect to me.  I think it would be both wrong
>and even more confusing if FriCAS and OpenAxiom tried to give the
>impression that they had no relation to each other and no relation at
>all to the original Axiom project when they still share between 75% to
>90% of the same code, the user languages are nearly (but not exactly)
>identical and for the most part they produce the same results.

Most common lisps share a large percentage of the CMUCL code because
most of the source code is common lisp and other lisps just copy it.

Indeed, SBCL shares 90% of the CMUCL code, including low level code
since it is a fork.

Considering they all implement the same standard, all the common 
lisps have identical results. 

SBCL never posts code or results and uses the name "CMUCL".
GCL never posts code or results under the CMUCL name.
CLISP never posts code or results under the CMUCL name.

As for the 75% to 90% of the code being shared, you'll notice that Boot
no longer exists in Axiom. I have hand-authored most of the replacement
code and expect it all to be rewritten by the end of the year.  So I've
written tens of thousands of lines of code that is not shared. A large
portion of the code in the interpreter (Volume 5) and the compiler 
(Volume 9) is code I rewrote from the Boot version. Even the algebra
syntax is not shared anymore. Waldek changed the meaning of primitives
like ^, symbol-creation, etc.

Code from one system will not even parse in the other.
Code you wrote on that page won't run in Axiom.

It is "wrong and confusing" to use the name Axiom when it is not Axiom.
Please stop.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]