Re: [Aldor-l] [Axiom-developer] Axiom for Aldor or Aldor for Axiom?

[Bill Page]

On 9/3/07, Stephen Watt wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 11:22:31PM -0400, Bill Page wrote:
> > ...
> > Are you aware that currently Aldor works within Axiom by compiling to
> > Lisp? How do you see FOAM being involved? Could you expand a little on
> > this comment?
>
> In case it is not clear:  FOAM is the compilation target for Aldor, and this
> is used to generate low-level Lisp.
>

Yes, I think that is clear. I wanted to understand how FOAM could be
used in Axiom as implied by Gaby's email.

> FOAM is designed to have only operations that are efficient both in Lisp
> and in a machine code-only environment.  (So, for example, there is no way
> to take an address of something.)
>

As an abstraction layer this makes very good sense. I believe that
Aldor also provides an interpreter for this layer: "-gloop", right?
But it is not clear to me how Axiom could make use of this.

On 9/3/07, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Sep 2007, Bill Page wrote:
>
> | > I would like, first, to improve inter-operability with Aldor libraries
> | > from within Axiom (and vice versa)  through ISA like FOAM.
> | >
> |
> | Sorry, what is "ISA"?
>
> "Instruction Set Architecture".  This is in reference to my goal to
> have a well defined Axiom Virtual Machine that is not tied to Lisp.
>

As I understand it, this was also the goal of the specification of
FOAM for Aldor.

> | Are you aware that currently Aldor works within Axiom by compiling to
> | Lisp?
>
> Yes. But, eventually, I want to move away from Lisp.
>

I agree with that - or perhaps at least I agree that it is desirable
to identify a specific subset of Lisp that is required to support
Axiom and it's current algebra library. I am thinking here for example
about CCL as used in the last commercial release of Axiom.

> | How do you see FOAM being involved?
>
> I would like to see more documentation of FOAM and its semantics -- I
> know there is a documentation; but I'm not sure how current it is and
> whether it provides me with all I need.  I briefly discussed the
> documentation issue with Stephen when I was in London last July.
>

What do you need to investigate this issue more deeply? Are you
willing to devote some time to reviewing and expanding the FOAM
documentation?

Regards,
Bill Page.