Bill Page <[email protected]> writes:

| Waldek, Ralf,
| 
| Apparently this behaviour once existed in Axiom but both OpenAxiom and
| FriCAS inherited a bug that prevents the compiler from noticing the
| missing definitions. This was recently corrected in a patch to
| OpenAxiom. I could probably find that patch if it would help to fix
| this problem in FriCAS.

OpenAxiom has popped in several discussions that I intend to address --
I have been on business travel for an extended period of time so I could
not fully participate in sustained discussions.

The issue is far more involved than described in Ralf's original message
because of existence of default implementations and implementations that
are controlled by complicated conditionals the actual values of which
are not known until instantiations with concrete constructor arguments.
If the compiler was to systematically abort on perceived missing
implementation, it would do so not only on constructors Ralf want to
reject but also on valid constructors.  So, the appropriate course of
action is to issue a Warning.  By definition,  there will be false positives.

As you pointed out, looong ago some versions of AXIOM implemented this
warning.  But, I think the warning was implemented for the so-called
"old runtime system", not the "new runtime system" which is used by all
flavours of AXIOMs that are based on the open-sourced AXIOM.

I tried to fix this for OpenAxiom based on my simplification of parts of
the runtime support; but I did not do a complete job and much remains to
be done.  It is on my list of things to do -- you should be able to find
a bug report entry for this at the SF database.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to