Re: Adding a generic mathematical library

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>
> Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 23:15:21 +0200
> 
> Michael Heerdegen via "Emacs development discussions." wrote:
> 
> >> It is much better to just say "we have decided not to do
> >> it" in post one.
> >
> > Nobody decided anything. Eli and others have to keep an eye
> > on that what people contribute fits into Emacs and doesn't
> > cause problems in the future.
> >
> > You started a discussion, valid questions and concerns have
> > been raised in response, and you just don't answer them, you
> > ignore valid questions.
> 
> Yes, I ignore, or optimally that would be the case anyway,
> anything and everything that has to do with _me_ whenever
> there is, or should be, a discussion about something else.

It is not about _you_, it's about the ideas you express and the code
you post.  Ignoring questions and concerns about those because you
interpret them as personal attacks is not wise, because it doesn't
advance the discussion in any constructive direction.

> If we, collectively, want generic libraries instead of having
> everything everywhere (and math in Calc as well as local
> code), then let's do it.
> 
> If we, collectively, don't want to do it for whatever reason,
> that's fine - but then just don't say it is because something
> that has to do with _me_.

Nothing in Emacs is done "collectively", ever.  Every progress in
Emacs is always a work of a single motivated individual, sometimes
with help from a small group of others who suggest changes and debug
and fix problems in the initial code.

So for any of this to happen, someone, a single person, should show
code for such a library, and the code must exhibit a good design and
in this case also use high-quality algorithms that provide accurate
and numerically-stable results.  I've not yet seen any such designs or
implementations suggested in this discussion, with the single possible
exception of a library that provides wrappers around Calc (which I
think you didn't like).