On 11/2/10 6:07 AM, David Kirkby wrote:
If Sage is ever to become a viable alternative to Mathematica, then it really needs the features of that program.
I think early on, there was a distinction made between focusing on having parity of features with other programs and having the features users really care about. The attitude here was that instead of looking at other programs and saying, "What do they have that we don't have?" we look at the *people* using those programs and say "What do we not have that you really want?"
Sage becomes an alternative because it implements the features the people need (whether or not other programs have those features), not because it has feature-parity with other programs.
You sort of say this too in your post. I just wanted to highlight it. Thanks, Jason -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
