> Since data in Lisp is already tagged, we can always prevent > unnecessary memory allocation, for Integer, we can use NIL > to indicate failure,
Really? The (lisp) integer 0 and NIL are distinguishable? Does that work for all implementations of lisp? I would bet that this is an implementation detail of the specific lisp fork (sbcl, ccl, gcl, etc.) > for List, we can use 0 to indicate failure. If this worked that would be great, but I somehow doubt it. > This way, we also solve the 'subtractIfCan' problem, no more > computation twice, no more unwanted alloc. Yep. There's only one big BUT. I don't like so much to make the FriCAS algebra dependent on LISP details. IF this is done, then it must be done in a very restricted area of the code. In general the Algebra code should have zero knowledge about whether it runs on top of C, Lisp, or Java. Ralf -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FriCAS - computer algebra system" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
