> -----Original Message-----
> From: maxima-bounces at math.utexas.edu [mailto:maxima-
> bounces at math.utexas.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Dodier
> Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 9:05 AM
> > )
>
> Lisp is a very bad model for Maxima syntax. FWIW.
(the old Mac-)Lisp is already a model for Maxima semantics. And to a
substantial extent it is a structural model for the Maxima language. As well
as the Mathematica language.
One difference being an alternative syntax for those who insist on infix.
Try typing in to maxima "+"(a,b,"*"(c,d)); {in Mathematica, a+b ==
Plus[a,b] }
Also notice sin(x) is functional.
The second difference is that Lisp is far more uniform and instead of
f(a,b,c) uses (f a b c).
While this may seem unnatural at first, it is so simple that students in a
first course at Berkeley learn to use it in an hour. By contrast, it takes
students weeks to understand the syntax of C++ or Java; so much so that they
do not even learn all the syntax in a full semester.
An argument I sometimes encounter is that a+b is ordinary mathematical
notation. True enough. But a*b is not. Mathematicians write ab, most
likely. And sin(x) is not mathematical either. Typically one would just
use sin x, and if typeset, with the x being in italics.
As I said previously, programming language syntax issues are often
problematical.
RJF
>
> > Using : is, in my view, confusing since that has another use.
>
> Let's think of another token, then.
>
> best
> Robert
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima