C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | If that's true, I was wondering what | > | sort of effort would be involved in tuning Axiom's use of | > categories to | > | be in line with category theory mathematics, along the lines of | > things | > | like Categories for the Working Mathematician. | > | > I think it would require to turn Axiom/Adlor into a macro system. | > I believe Axiom's terminology is very confusing, even if the analogy | > with "Category Theory" can be catchy. Axiom does not rely on | > "structures", it relies on OO tagging. | | Hmm. macro in the sense of lisp macros or in the sense of a | "metamathematics" system?
I would say between lisp macros and C macros. [...] | Do you mean introducing Computer Algebra to students or starting out | the Algebra volumes? [...] | > You can have a look at Generic Haskell and PolyP for how and what it | > takes to get a first approximation of categorical datatypes in a | > programming language. | | OK, I'll take a look. Thanks! Do you mean an implementation of | categorical datatypes on top of a language or the datatypes as part of | the language definition? the latter. -- Gaby _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
