Hi all
I want to make it clear first that I think Lisp is the best
programming language of the world. I love Lisp even if I know it much
less than I love it.
As Paul Graham says, if I could do a project for the next 100 years,
I'd have no doubt in using Lisp. But...we don't have neither 100 nor
If lisp itself is not perfect, in the long run (say 30 years) it may be
another problem. So why improve lisp first (in example say lisp++)? It seems
if you don't plan and choose the write language, this transition need can
emerge in the future again...
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 8:59 PM, William
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:07 PM, ahmet alper parker aapar...@gmail.com wrote:
If lisp itself is not perfect, in the long run (say 30 years) it may be
another problem. So why improve lisp first (in example say lisp++)? It seems
if you don't plan and choose the write language, this transition
On Apr 2, 12:07 pm, ahmet alper parker aapar...@gmail.com wrote:
If lisp itself is not perfect, in the long run (say 30 years) it may be
another problem. So why improve lisp first (in example say lisp++)?
I suggest to fork python, call it sagepy, and build some lisp++ on top
of python's lambda
Can I remind everyone that it is no longer April 1 in any timezone?
(Though Maite tells me that in Spain, April Fool's Day is in
December.
John
2009/4/2 Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com:
On Apr 2, 12:07 pm, ahmet alper parker aapar...@gmail.com wrote:
If lisp itself is not perfect, in
Harald Schilly wrote:
I suggest to fork python, call it sagepy, and build some lisp++ on top
of python's lambda operator. Then, with it's own language, sage is
more powerful than anything else out there and attracts developers
from all over the world.
A program so massive that nothing, not
You guys are nuts. When I read the post, I almost shit my pants! I
hope it really was an April's fool joke. But since we're at it, I'd
vote for Aldor.
This brings me to a related point, which is not a joke: When is the
move to Python3 planned for Sage?
Hazem
On Apr 2, 10:58 am, Robert Dodier
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
You guys are nuts. When I read the post, I almost sh*t my pants! I
hope it really was an April's fool joke.
It was an April's fool joke.
But since we're at it, I'd vote for Aldor.
I'm saving that for next year.
This
It was real scary for a non-developer like me, since I honestly could
not tell whether it was a joke from you original post :)
Thanks for the clarifications.
Hazem
On Apr 2, 1:53 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Hazem hazem.biqa...@gmail.com wrote:
It was real scary for a non-developer like me, since I honestly could
not tell whether it was a joke from you original post :)
Sorry to scare you, and I'm glad my April 1 joke was so convincing?
It was also a commentary
Not being an expert on Lisp, I was willing to entertain the
possibility that Lisp may have technical advantages, but massive
redesign and re-coding of Sage at this stage seemed like a huge
mistake. I thought you had lost it, and wondered about the future of
Sage because of it!
I'm afraid many
Hi,
Please be benevolent to Sage users in Asia when you post a joke next
year because its time stamp I see is April 2. Anyway I was amuzed. ^^
Kwankyu
Korea
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe
April's fool joke? Nice. If all this fails, can you use Java instead :)
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 1:59 PM, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
About two years ago we made the painful transition from using Darcs to
Mercurial for our revision control system. This was difficult, but had
to
Frankly, I think we have similar problems using Python at the core of
Sage. I've been thinking very hard about how to deal with this for
nearly a year now, and have come to the conclusion that we should make
a switch from using Python at the core of Sage to Lisp.
Too obvious.
Nick
A very closely related announcement is the following from Google:
http://mail.google.com/mail/help/autopilot/index.html
- kcrisman
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Well this is not a response to outline my concerns with the proposal
(which I have to say is ambitious). Instead, I'd like to add my
support to the project to convert all of Sage to LISP.
In particular, I'd be happy to work on forking MPIR and FLINT and
rewriting them in LISP (given appropriate
William Stein wrote:
2. Porting: We have an intense sequence if Lisp days, both
workshops and 1-day long IRC events, where we go line-by-line through
the Sage library and rewrite everything in Lisp. As we go, we'll
make sure that the rewritten code is always at least as fast as the
On Apr 1, 10:59 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
About two years ago we made the painful transition from using Darcs to
Mercurial for our revision control system. This was difficult, but had
to be done because it was hard to get Darcs to run everywhere, and
there were weird
I am deeply disappointed in the direction you are proposing. If you
are going to switch languages at this point, it should be to a more
modern language than Lisp. So I plan on forking the Sage project with
a Haskell rewrite. I think time will tell which is the better choice.
I am open to
For a long time, I've been complaining about the interface between
Maxima and Sage. It doesn't just make calculus slow, it slows
everything down -- every time I take a logarithm or a square root in a
numerical algorithm, Maxima slows me down. I now realize that the
right solution has just been
Whoah, hang on there. I hope you're not pushing for FLINT and MPIR in
lisp by next year!
That 4 year goal seems reasonable did NOT refer to FLINT and MPIR.
That referred to the lisp wrapper for the current C code.
Bill.
On 1 Apr, 20:10, Tom Boothby tomas.boot...@gmail.com wrote:
For a long
John Cremona wrote:
I still have some programs written in Algol68 if anyone is interested!
Algol60, not larger than 16k?
Jaap
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Marshall Hampton hampto...@gmail.com wrote:
I am deeply disappointed in the direction you are proposing. If you
are going to switch languages at this point, it should be to a more
modern language than Lisp. So I plan on forking the Sage project with
a
On Apr 1, 2009, at 10:59 AM, William Stein wrote:
I've been thinking very hard about how to deal with this for
nearly a year now, and have come to the conclusion that we should make
a switch from using Python at the core of Sage to Lisp. The
transition won't be easy, but it will be well
2009/4/1 Jaap Spies j.sp...@hccnet.nl:
John Cremona wrote:
I still have some programs written in Algol68 if anyone is interested!
Algol60, not larger than 16k?
Certainly not, Algol 60 is so old-fashioned. With Alogol68 you can
define your own classes complete with your own in- pre- and
On Apr 1, 11:59 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
a switch from using Python at the core of Sage to Lisp. The
transition won't be easy, but it will be well worth the effort, since
in the time frame I have in mind (30 years, say) I see Lisp really
taking off,
You could have a very
Hey, I'm with you there Marshall!
I am going to create a Mathematica fork of Sage, where everything
in Sage will be rewritten in Mathematica. I'll start simple, say with
the basic commands on group theory and ring theory. Let's see, a name?
Got it. I'ill call the fork Mathematica Basic Sage or
I have just received a cease-and-desist letter from the lawyers
(Dewey,CheetumHowe) hired by Mathematica. They say they
have a trademark on Mathematica BS. So that puts an end to
my plans to create a fork.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:21 PM, David Joyner wdjoy...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey, I'm with you
About two years ago we made the painful transition from using Darcs to
Mercurial for our revision control system. This was difficult, but had
to be done because it was hard to get Darcs to run everywhere, and
there were weird corner cases where Darcs would hang. Mercurial isn't
optimal but
29 matches
Mail list logo
