The last commercial version of Axiom was shipped with some Axiom packages and domains already converted to Aldor. I think it would be good to continue this conversion process in an incremental manner
Hello, In Aldor we write Foo: with { coerce: Integer -> %; test?: % -> Boolean; } == add { Rep == String; ... } and mean something like Foo = ((%, Integer, Boolean), (coerce, test?)) in the multisort
Unfortunately, from the Aldor people nobody seems to care. As far as I remember, I contacted Manuel Bronstein and Stephen Watt, but I never got any response. They are probably rather busy. You should
Pippijn I wish you would consider simply adopting the Modified BSD license. It would make it much easier to integrate your work (albeit not Aldor itself) directly with Axiom. Adding yet-other-license
Hello, [...] when you get a handful of motivated people, yes. Maybe we should open up a Wiki and call for people on the FrontPage similar to the FreeAldor link. Bear in mind, that you are trying to r
Great. make 3.8 was released in 2002. I wonder why 3.79.x is still so common? Upgrading to make 3.8 seems to be as simple as download, configure, make ... Since Peter claims his java code is "simple"
Axiom is licensed under Modified BSD. I've never heard of ISC. I did learn a few things from the lawyer, such as, most people are not capable of actually reading and understanding a license. This is
"Instruction Set Architecture". This is in reference to my goal to have a well defined Axiom Virtual Machine that is not tied to Lisp. Yes. But, eventually, I want to move away from Lisp. I would lik
Hello, That is a very good point. Does that also imply that you cannot answer any technical question about the *Aldor language*? I assume the "you" does not refer to me, but someone having seen the c
(2) -> l : List Ring := [Integer] Cannot convert an element of the construct to type Any . (2) -> l : Ring := Integer Ring is a category, not a domain, and declarations require domains. Martin PS: PL
but, such a new compiler would have to reinvent everything from scratch. A lot have been done in recent years in terms for dependent types (Nurpl, epigram, etc.), functional languages implementations
Hi Bill, Foo: with { g: (n: PositiveInteger, k: PositiveInteger) -> PrimeField(n) } == add { g(n: PositiveInteger, k: PositiveInteger ): PrimeField(n) == k::Integer::PrimeField(n) } Ok, I will work w
Tim, I installed "Aldor version 1.0.2 for LINUX(glibc2.3)" on axiom-developer.org several months ago. The date on the aldor tarball in /home/page is May 19 2004. Aldor should be accessible to you whe
Oops, sorry that I have not read the documentation of Any. I had a look at Any now. Well, from that I just got the feeling that a programmer should never use Any if there are better types around (and
William, Very Neat! Yes, this is a bug in the Windows version of Axiom caused by the fact that the Axiom code expects to be able to run unix system commands like `rm' (which means delete file). In th
Well that is more or less what I naively thought as well but from the ANY.spad file I read that: )abbrev domain ANY Any ++ Author: Robert S. Sutor ++ Basic Functions: any, domainOf, objectOf, dom, ob
In fact you just pointed a way to solve the problem! Notice that you are in effect constructing a domain! So first create this domain (call this anything else you like): --%PointedPrimeField )abbrev