[Maxima] Maxima rationals compared to CL rationals
fateman at EECS.Berkeley.EDU
Thu Aug 2 13:37:25 CDT 2007
I don't understand why GCL would be much lower by making these changes.
Allowing CL rationals can be done easily in some sense. Changing definitions to access the
numerator and denominator of rats so they work for CL rationals "should" make it all work,
but if someone failed to use the abstraction and picked out the numerator by using "cadr" -- that's trouble.
----- Original Message -----
From: Barton Willis <willisb at unk.edu>
Date: Thursday, August 2, 2007 11:17 am
Subject: Re: [Maxima] Maxima rationals compared to CL rationals
> I agree that allowing CL rational numbers (and CL double floats)
> to be valid Maxima expression would be nice. But it wouldn't fix any
> bugs, it wouldn't extend user functionality, and it would make GCL
> Maxima run more slowly (maybe the GCL slowness problem could be easily
> fixed). And such a change might cause little bugs years after the
> change. It's hardly worth mentioning, but allowing CL rationals
> would break some (maybe a great deal of) Macsyma code.
> But if somebody wants to try, that's great.
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
More information about the Maxima