Here is the best argument I know: occasionally the LM or PDP-10
code has some information, like the best way to write this code
in assembly language for PDP-10, or how neat the LM code would be
and isn't it too bad that it couldn't be done in Common Lisp
this way...
Even given that argument my tendency would be to delete
PDP-10 or Lisp Machine -only code to improve readability,
when revising a program, especially since it could not
be tested on those machines (ever?).
RJF
Raymond Toy wrote:
>>>>>>"Wolfgang" == Wolfgang Jenkner <wjenkner@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
>>>>>
>
> Wolfgang> Update of /cvsroot/maxima/maxima/share/affine
> Wolfgang> In directory sc8-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv1179
>
> Wolfgang> Modified Files:
> Wolfgang> polyb.lisp
> Wolfgang> Log Message:
> Wolfgang> *RED: Comment out code for Lisp machine. The feature test #+3600 is
> Wolfgang> not ANSI CL conform and nobody supports this, anyway.
>
> This brings up another question: Should we do this for other parts of
> the code? Like the stuff for ti and pdp10 and other systems that will
> probably never be used again. Deleting this would help to make some
> of the code much easier to read and maintain.
>
> Ray
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima@www.math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima