RE: [Axiom-developer] B#

[C Y]

--- Bill Page <address@hidden> wrote:

> I think of B# as first of all generalizing 'Expression' so that
> all of the computations that a user is likely to want to do can
> be done entirely within that one domain - just as if they were
> calculating using Maple or Mathematica. And then simplifying
> the syntax and semantics of the Spad language so that it always
> implicitly refers to this generalized domain. And there is some
> syntactic sugar to add to make this all a little sweeter.

Sounds like a good way to make Axiom more friendly for new (and casual)
users.
 
> But rather than Spad, I would argue that Aldor is actually a
> better choice for the B# implementation language. We have
> discussed elsewhere on this list the fact that Aldor has 
> already been used to write a parser for the Aldor language. 
> Doing something similar for the B# language seems completely 
> feasible to me.

I agree this is a job for a high level language, but I would suggest
that the Aldor licensing situation be clarified before implementing B#
in it.  (I promise I'll move to axiom-legal if the discussion around
this heats up ;-).

> If we use Aldor (or Spad) to implement B#, then a user would
> start using B# by invoking the read-eval-print-loop within the
> B# package something like this:
> 
> (1) -> repl()$Bnatural
> 
> Of course this could be hidden for first time users within the
> initial axiom.input file.

Right.

> After invoking the repl, the user's interaction would be
> controlled by the B# package as described in the Jenks and
> Trager article.
> 
> What do you think? Is there enough interest in this to declare
> this as an "official" Axiom open source project?

I would say so!  We want users, and Axiom's type system is frequently
cited as a high hurdle for beginners.

I like the idea of starting out in B-natural, and then for advanced
users being able to "drop down" into the current environment when
strong typing becomes a tool rather than a distraction.  The full power
of Axiom is hidden but when the user wants to expand they will find the
system able to do so.

Cheers,
CY

P.S.  Bill, just a quick dumb question on the Real Number stuff - are
Real Numbers on a computer just an expansion of Floats?  E.g. Floats
are designed to map well to the limitations of the low level
processors, and Reals are a superset of Floats but make no attempt to
be easy on the hardware?


                
__________________________________ 
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page! 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs