🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1990Nov6.191819.13114@athena.mit.edu>, rlcarr@athena.mit.edu
(Richard L. Carreiro) says:

>I sent mail to the Maple people asking them what's up, and here's the
>reply:

>Date: Tue, 6 Nov 90 12:47:01 GMT
>From: Joyce Brennan <jbrennan@daisy.waterloo.edu>
>To: rlcarr@ATHENA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: Re:  Maple for Amiga
>Cc: jbrennan@daisy.waterloo.edu
            ... stuff omitted ....
>The kernel of Maple is finished.  The projected user interface would
>be very similar to the X Maple. In fact, our idea is to copy the X
>Maple features into the Amiga machine. This will be finalized
>once I receive and read through all the manuals.


Since X is available for the Amiga, maybe Waterloo would simply
license it.  Then they'd be finished today.  This has the usual X
advantages, too (no flames about the X disadvantages, if you can resist
please please please)



>> c) if so, will 4.4 have any support for the 68881/2 math coprocessor?

>In an effort to accommodate the needs of all Amiga users, this new
>version will probably not support the math coprocessor (since many
>Amiga machines are not equipped with this coprocessor).

Isn't the point of the math libraries that all programs use the math
libraries to do math?  Then, if your machine doesn't have a math
processor, the math library does the work.  If it does have a math
processor, then the math library knows how to access it.

Perhaps Maple has written all their own floating point math functions.
If so, unless they have some really good reason, they should be shown
the error of their ways.

Discalaimer:  What do I know?