On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 00:00, C Y wrote:
> I propose adding 9) impliment a posteval mechanism as discussed earlier
> (this might fall under low level lisp stuff?) according to Barton's
> ideas. This is a relatively small change in its final implimentation,
> and easy to document. The most significant event is changing the
> toplevel macsyma eval command from a defmacro to a defun, but in
> testing this makes no difference that we have observed thus far. It
> successfully handles the earlier reported behavior tellsimpafter
> couldn't handle (at least readily).
>
> If this needs to wait I certainly understand, but I think it can be
> reasonably included in 5.9.2 and it would be convenient for later work.
I have to confess that I'm a little nervous about this one. Adding what
amounts to an entire new mechanism to Maxima needs to be very carefully
considered. I didn't look at the details on changing the toplevel maxima
eval command yet.
Are there any dissenters to CY's plan? Now would be the time to say so.
--Jim