Another reason. If you don't do it, Maxima will become obsolete.
Mathematica can do it. Maple can do it. I don't have access to any other
CAS, but they might be able to do it too.
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Hennessy
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 1:07 PM
To: Richard Fateman ; Maxima - list
Subject: Re: [Maxima] parallel cell executing and wxmaxima
Why, you might ask? Portability. Uniformity. Easier.
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Hennessy
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 1:02 PM
To: Richard Fateman ; Maxima - list
Subject: Re: [Maxima] parallel cell executing and wxmaxima
This is like saying that if you want to have C++ be able to do threads you
have to do it in assembly language. This is not the point. I want the
higher level language to be able to do it. In this analogy C++.
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Fateman
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 12:43 PM
To: Richard Hennessy ; Maxima - list
Subject: Re: [Maxima] parallel cell executing and wxmaxima
1. It is presumably possible for some front end to start up any number
of Maxima processes that may or may not be runnable in parallel on
one or more CPUs or locations on some network.
Whether this is something you want to do or not, it doesn't require
changes in Maxima.
2. In some lisp systems it is possible to harness several CPUs to
do parallel processing in some way. Sometimes in more than
one way. If you want to seriously consider running Maxima using
several processors within the same lisp system, I think you could
pick one of the lisp systems and learn about its process model(s)
and think about use could be made of them.
3. Common Lisp does not specify parallelism.
RJF