Serge D. Mechveliani wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 10:06:23PM +0100, Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
> > Instead of answering your questions in detail, how do you want to access
> > the axiom library?
> >
> > Suppose set something up where the axiom lib is compiled to haskell
> > virtual machine code (i.e. runs on HM if I understood you correctly).
> > With some effort that should be possible, but it would still be unclear
> > how to actually call functions from the library.
>
> Convert the needed domain description to the Lisp data which expresses
> this domain in Axiom. To write this interface, one needs to know, for
> example, how a prime field k is represented as a Lisp data in Axiom,
> how it is represented a polynomial over this k, and so on.
Prime field is represented just as any other type: as a Lisp
vector. The element at index 0 is type name. Element at
index 4 describes categories to which domais belong. Other
elements contain data associated to doamin (in this case the
prime) and functions. The elements of prime field are just
Lisp integers.
> It looks difficult, I do not know ...
>
>
> > But suppose even that has been done somehow. Then there is the problem
> > of "destructive functions", i.e. functions like
> >
> > setelt!(a, 5, 1)
> >
> > which set the 5th element of (an array) a to 1. The axiom library is
> > non-functional in quite some places. If you connect it to Haskell, you
> > surely want to put a wrapper around it so that it will look functional.
>
> I am sorry for being so light-headed.
> I thought the Axiom library is compiled to Common Lisp. And I have
> heard, Common Lisp is functional. But now, I see a contradiction:
> I know that Spad is not functional. For example, in what Lisp code
> setelt!(a, 5, 1) is compiled?
>
Common Lisp is impure: it contains assignment.
>
> > Furthermore, if you don't translate code from SPAD to Haskell, but
> > rather have only running them on the same virtual machine, you still
> > have the problem that bugfixes and improvements have to be written in
> > SPAD.
>
> I somehow need to suppose that the Axiom library has not bugs (?).
Well, FriCAS library got bigger by about 10% in last 3 years. And
I hope it will continue to grow. And there are several improvemenets,
for example polynomial multiplication is much faster that it was
in Axiom era.
--
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.
