Error conditions for maxima vs commercial code., also, who owns our name?

I think that the error handling from the commercial code
is not very well designed, though it may be better than
maxima's.

I think that every error message possible should be logged
in some way, with an explanation of what might have caused
it.  It therefore helps to have a unique word or number
as a prefix, so they can be sorted.

Some errors in macsyma throw you into a lisp break, which
is probably not what most people want.  There is some
debugmode:true option, but that may not be what people
want either.

By the way, it occurred to me that there may be some
other users of the name Maxima for software.  There
are several I found in 2 minutes with Google.  a CAD tool,
a router tool, an animation tool, a middleware package.
There is also a Nissan automobile model.

Just thought you should know.
RJF


C Y wrote:

> --- James Amundson <amundson@fnal.gov> wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, 2001-11-28 at 14:30, Dan Stanger wrote:
>>
>>>In general, how important is it for us to conform to the same error
>>>handling of the commercial code.
>>>
>>Given
>>(a) Conforming to the error handling of the commercial code has not
>>been a priority in the past, at least as far as I know.
>>(b) It is now very difficult to get a copy of the commercial code.
>>
>>I would say "not very." I might feel differently if commercial code
>>was currently available.
>>
> 
> One question we might want to put forth in connection with that subject
> is how many people out there have stuff which would require such
> conforming in order to work?  Also, was/is the error handling of the
> commerical system better than what we currently have?
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
> http://shopping.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima@www.math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>