Maxima is not a typed system, and this matters, I think.
Next, when you talk about a name, like xxx, are you talking about
the xxx in
f(xxx):= ....
or
f():=block([xxx: ...])
or
sum(...,xxx,a,b)
or
global xxx
or
matchdeclare(xxx,pred);
or ...
and can you have two or more different contexts for features like
the assume context?
And if you are talking about a constant, like 43, then features
like even or odd are apparent. Is 2*i+1 odd? is z real?
I just came back from a trip, and I haven't sorted through all this
mail, so maybe I'm repeating or missing something....
I don't usually use Mathematica as a guidepost, but WRI has the
benefit of having looked at this aspect of description more
recently than most. That or Axiom, could be a guide.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barton Willis" <willisb at unk.edu>
To: "Richard Fateman" <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu>
Cc: <macrakis at alum.mit.edu>; "Barton Willis" <willisb at unk.edu>;
<Maxima at math.utexas.edu>; "Robert Dodier" <robert.dodier at gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 2:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Maxima] featurep(e, real)
> -----"Richard Fateman" wrote: -----
>
>>I think it would be much more important to
>>have what is essentially a type-checking functionality
>>that works, versus a function that attempts to solve an
>>undecidable problem using methods that are poorly
>>defined.
>>
>>You can have both, but they shouldn't be
>>the same name.
>
> OK. How does typeof( , real) differ from featurep( , real)?
> What is a rough specification for typeof( , real)? What is
> the advantage to having two functions that try to do the
> same thing? Sure, featurep( , real) must be a satisficing
> function. So it goes.
> Barton
>
>