I don't believe that the issue is types at all, neither static nor dynamic types. After all, lisp is dynamically typed and spad lives on top of it (static types). The issue is the choice of types and their possible interactions.
I believe that Axiom is mildly unique in the CAS world because the type (category, domain) hierarchy attempts to mirror the mathematical structures. I believe that this gives Axiom a pre-existing design scaffold which should allow it to grow in linear complexity as it grows linearly in size. Designs (or lack thereof) that do not mirror the mathematical hierarchy have nonlinear interactions that eventually limit their size and complexity. Maple and MMA programs tend to suffer this kind of pain when they start mixing user packages. That's not to say that Axiom gets it right, but at least it tries. Tim _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
