On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 3:00 PM, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't think that Axiom's solution can work for Sage because > Axiom is a strongly typed language. But it does highlight at > least one other point in the space of design decisions.
`argument dependent name lookup' (which is what Axiom systems have as language feature) is not just a trait of a statically typed language. Given sufficient motivation, Python could be extended to make it work. However, the way it works in Axiom systems is just half part of the story. It works only one of the arguments has domain (or category) that exports the operation. Meaning if you stick the operations in a package, then you are hosed. :-( Which brings us to the fundamental problem I raised in an previous message: Axiom systems want to insist that a value belongs to a single domain (so that ADL, for example, can work), when in fact that view is too restrictive and too limited. Axiom systems have the strength that they are strongly typed; but their computation models need to be deeply revised when they are intended to be `solved' as solutions. -- Gaby --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
