>But they wouldn't! Why would you think that any of your work was >lost when you install axiom after having installed friCAS? The only >difference is, if the names wouldn't change, they wouldn't need to >adjust paths they currently don't even know about.
Oh, but they DO. Try to do parallel installations. Being able to run Fricas and Axiom in parallel would be great. >Really, if this mess stays the same, it will drive me mad. Already I >have to include 3 email lists if I want to say something all axioms >should care about, which is the case most of the time, since I'm >working only on the algebra level. Cooperation in this manner is for >me such a nuisance, that I'd rather stop it. I try hard to add the critical patches from OpenAxiom and Fricas and I run into this all the time. I'd estimate that reverse-engineering critical patches takes about 25% of my time. Patches rarely have test cases that illustrate what was broken or fixed so I have to guess. I've tried to minimize this pain "outward" by documenting how to install the new )help facility and how to install the regression test facility. When the new )browse facility gets more stable I'll also document how to port it to the other systems. In addition my patches give rather-longer explanations of what they do so it is easier to understand if they might be of interest. Unfortunately the )help, )browse, regression testing, and the coming )example facilities all are closely related to literate programming which will make them hard to port to other systems. > I cannot understand why you want different names for the same thing! Sigh. See the mailing list archives. Tim _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
