Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: Aldor and Axiom

[Martin Rubey]

Ralf Hemmecke <address@hidden> writes:

> >> How do we resolve things like Aldor's libalgebra vs. Axiom's libraries?
> 
> > I would propose that we forget about Aldor's native libraries for now (as
> > nice, though limited, as they are).
> 
> If I knew where to hook libaldor into Axiom, I would already have done
> so. But libaldor basically starts from zero and for Axiom the whole
> construction of the domains and categories is still mystical to me.
> 
> In any case if SPAD should be translated to Aldor one has to start with some
> domain or category.

Yes. But what exactly is mystical to you? Everything starts in catdef.spad, and
in fact the code is very easy to read, I find.

The polynomial hierarchy should probably be taken from Aldor, I believe it is
superior.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, the real effort would be to design a sound hierarchy and then translate the
bits one at a time, using new algorithms as we go along. (For example,
replacing the huge algorithm for calculating the limit of an expression by the
simple mrv algorithm also used by MuPAD)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe it is even possible to mix libraries in an intermediate step, so that we
don't have to do the transition all at once.

Some time ago I proposed to Antoine to implement a hierarchy of function
domains (i.e., polynomials, rational functions, algebraic functions, holonomic
functions, etc.), since this is currently missing, resp., not well solved in
Axiom. This would also be in a sense quite independent of the implementation of
other classes, so I suppose it should be done in Aldor.

Martin