C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...]
| I guess it depends on the details of how such things are handled. You | are proposing to have code at the SPAD level talk directly to things | like external libraries? My proposal is to formally specify a way for SPAD codes to talk to external libraries. I don't think such an interface must necessarily be through Lisp first. [...] | > All of that, including interfacing with nay reasonable language used | > in the computational science community -- that list goes beyond | > Fortran and C. | | Indeed. C++, Java, Python, Haskell, CAML, ML, various proof | languages... more I'm sure that aren't leaping to mind. You know more | about those things than I do Gaby, so perhaps the difficulties are less | severe than I am imagining, but I was under the impression that | translating from one language to another is highly non-trivial. I'm not saying it is trivial. However, if we must attempt only trivial things there is little hope to make Axiom interesting. We must be ambitious and approximate the ideals. | Particularly if the program is written in such a way as to assume | communication only with other Java/C/ML/etc. programs. Lisp's FFI | systems are probably among the most general solutions to such problems, | and even they have a host of issues. Lisp interface may be a proof-of-concept, but my belief is that it should not be the final answer. -- Gaby _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
