Re: [Axiom-developer] Axiom meeting at ISSAC

[Stephen Wilson]

Gabriel Dos Reis <address@hidden> writes:

> (iii) of course, the answer is yes.  As I mentioned earlier, there are two
>     parser in Axiom, an old and a new.  You're looking at the old compiler.

Of course I am looking at the old compiler, it is the only compiler.
It accepts one AST, not two.  That AST does not contain line/column
information.  The AST which Axiom uses does not contain line/column
information.  That information is intentionally erased at one point of
parsing or another, old or new, it does not matter.

> | The system is not extensible or flexible by any rational
> | measurement.  
> 
> I suspect it is more accurate to say:
> 
>   The system is not extensible or flexible by any Stephen Wilson's
>   measurement.
> 
> Care should be exercised before generalizing to "rational".

Yep, absolutely.  That is my opinion.  Rational thinking was used to
formulate it.


As for the rest of your post, I am not even going to bother trying to
explain.  If you dont understand the issues, thats your problem.


> 
> | > (2) And, as expected, your questions were rhetorical.
> | 
> | Of course they were.  I was trying to explain the work I am doing and
> | you effectively dismissed it by saying "you dont need to wait for a
> | new compiler", which is not true.
> 
> "dismiss" is the way you chose to see a *factual statement* that
> the current compiler can be used as a library roday, and that has been
> done for real.
> 
> I would not venture to say that if I speculated you would have interpreted 
> it as "celebrated".  Anyway, I'm quite amazed.
> 
> [...]
> 
> | I will be more than happy to discount your autoconf patch when it is
> | ready based on the fact that we already have a build system which more
> | or less works,  if your interested in that kind of collaboration.
> 
> You must have a serious problem.
> 
> -- Gaby