Re: Adding a generic mathematical library

[Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>>> To have a math library on ELPA, the library should be
>>> reasonably-comprehensive, use solid algorithms, and solve
>>> problems that happen in real life frequently enough.
>>> By contrast, my impression from looking at your library [...]
>> 
>> Unbelievable, no one has suggested adding that file
>> to ELPA.
>
> You said, and I quote:
>
>> Maybe we should have a math library in ELPA, then it will be
>> less hesitation to just add stuff that is desired as we go
>> along, not having to argue what relevance it has to Emacs
>> per se as a piece of text editing software.
>
> I was not sure whether you were talking about the library
> you posted, so I qualified myself, quote again:

That's not a library or file prepared for ELPA as you well
know, it is just a bunch of functions. I have several such
files that I have written myself since Emacs don't have it.
Time, permutations, negative subtraction, some stats,
yada yada.

>> If what you offer is to have a completely different
>> library, then we need first to talk what will be in it and
>> which algorithms it will implement. "Math functions" is
>> a very broad term, so defining the scope for such a library
>> is not a trivial job.
>
> Okay?

(I didn't write that.)

>>> is that it is an ad-hoc collection of functions that solve
>>> problems you personally find useful, but their general
>>> usefulness is IMO questionable
>> 
>> Incorrect, most math functions in it are really basic so
>> one would expect them to be present in one form of another.
>
> I disagree. My evidence is that the need for functions
> presented in your library, if it exists, was not strong
> enough, otherwise people would be asking for some of these
> functions long ago.

Math is not popular enough?

We have Tetris in core Emacs and stuff in ELPA no one would
ever know existed.

But math - naah, people don't need it in the world's
programmer's editor number one. No one told you they want it
so they cannot have ever wanted it. Simple!

Well, I have said it several times and now other people say it
as well. Math is huge in tech and science and a lot of other
fields as well were we want to be. It is also something a lot
of programmers are passionate about. _And_ a lot of
non-programmers do math!

Old school engineers used to know two things: how to do math
and how to draw drawings and schematics. That was the basic.

And there are many more examples.

>> Unbelievable comment. This is indeed the problem that
>> happens, as has been said in this very thread: without
>> libraries and common projects individual people solve their
>> problems locally with no incremental gain from one person
>> to another. So it won't be as good. And now you see an
>> example of that, bringing it up as a reason we can't have
>> a math library in ELPA?
>
> OK, so if you want to talk about adding a math library,
> I point you back to my comment above: we should first
> discuss its scope and design.

Well, the people doing it, at least.

The scope to begin with: everything easy and basic you expect
to find in it.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal