>> Having spent a fair portion of my life porting software, I understand >> the frustrations you feel. And having spent the bulk of my life using >> Lisp I "get" the get-rid-of-lisp pushback. But a lot of astonishingly >> good computer algebra exists in lisp (we won't discuss the reasons). >> Reproducing Axiom's "million-things-of-code" in Python would be no >> small task, especially since some of the experts are dead. > >Well, many things are available in non-lisp CASes and many of them are >in Sage, so it isn't that Sage without Axiom isn't viable [not that >you implied that]. If a sufficient number of people want Lisp to >remain a significant player in the CAS world [and computer science in >general] it will be so. We are not forcing you to use Python or Sage. >This is all about what tool gets the job done for you and in your case >it is Axiom ;)
Well, Sage doesn't actually use Axiom. William has no long term focus except to compete with the 4Ms. Sage doesn't use GCL. And the project is strongly motivated to elide lisp. Except for my involvement in the Sage program committee for the Nancy conference, I don't see that I can be of much help. Sorry for the noise. Tim --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
