Kai Kaminski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

| Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| 
| > | > | Yeah, most of those conditionals are what make the C code hard to 
port.
| > | >
| > | > no harder than the lisp non-portable sutff all over the place in the
| > | > Axiom source code.  I don't think we have a perfect language match
| > | > here in terms of portability.  I've coded for longtime in C and C++; I
| > | > don't think this particular is stuff is handled the proper way.
| > | I'm not going to start another pro-Lisp discussion. But I'd like to
| > | point out that Axiom's Lisp code is not representative of (modern)
| > | Lisp code. Furthermore the conditionals aren't organized very well and
| > | most of them are superfluos anyway, because they are for Lisps that
| > | are long dead and forgotten.
| >
| > Probably.
| >
| >
| > I followed this discussion
| >
| >   http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/2006/014309.html
| >
| > with some interest.
| Ok, I read the first dozen messages or so, but I'm not sure what
| you're aiming at (IEEE 754 or FFI?). Could you give me a hint?

no, sorry reference to the wrong discussion

   http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/2006/014315.html

-- Gaby


_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer

Reply via email to