Martin Rubey wrote:
> Arthur Ralfs <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> >> Dear Mike, dear Stephen,
> >>
> >> Happy new year.
> >>
> >> May I ask you again to consider the attached request.
> >>
> >> Thank you
> >> Ralf
> >>
> >
> > Dear Ralf,
> >
> > What does spad need to make aldor irrelevant?
>
> Generators and dependent types
>
> (dependent types being slightly more important in my opinion)
>
If that are only things that you miss from Aldor, then Aldor
clearly already is irrelevant :). Seriously, I think that
better error messages from Spad compiler, better speed,
support for exceptions, recursive datatypes and pattern
matching are more important. And I would like to use
_evaluated_ parameters during tychecking (current check)
is purely syntactic. Also, we probably need some mechanizm
to make type annotations less verbose.
I would say that for new users Aldor is irrelevant: chance
that it will became trurly free is too low, and Spad while
lacking in some aspects also have advantages.
BTW: I hoped that Aldor users will suggest some useful features
that are easy to add, but I see no suggestion...
--
Waldek Hebisch
[email protected]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en.
