It would certainly be possible in principle to implement a function such as:evaluate: InputForm -> InputForm which attempts to 'interpret' its input and if possible returns the InputForm derived from the corresponding value, otherwise it would return the input unchanged.
Well, if one uses Axiom (which was designed to be *typed*) in order to implement such an evaluate function, then one basically implements an untyped CAS inside a typed CAS. Possible, but why would I want that?
There might be some use cases for this, but personally, I am so happy that Axiom is typed, that I find this making-Axiom-untyped (or one-typed, i.e. just InputForm) a bit counter-productive.
Ralf _______________________________________________ Axiom-math mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-math
