Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ho95e.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!ho95e!wcs
From: wcs@ho95e.UUCP (x0705)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: Using LISP for scientific programming? (gasp!)
Message-ID: <146@ho95e.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 9-Sep-85 21:20:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: ho95e.146
Posted: Mon Sep  9 21:20:42 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Sep-85 04:27:26 EDT
References: <909@oddjob.UUCP> <163@ho95e.UUCP> <152@rtp47.UUCP> <1057@sdcsvax.UUCP> <799@kuling.UUCP> <1250@teddy.UUCP> <960@oddjob.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 16

> >The fact that stack-oriented architectures are better served by expressions
> >in RPN notation is no damned excuse. Computers exist to serve people, not
> >the other way around.
> 
> From what I've heard about lisp, it is highly maleable as far as its notation
> is concerned; are there any implementations which use algebraic notation and
> which are available as compilers (i.e. not Macsyma)?
> 					Scott Anderson ihnp4!oddjob!kaos!sra

While minimal LISP systems may only provide simple arithmetic operators, it
shouldn't be real tough to write a parser to do formula translation; viz.
	(ForTran '( (A + B) * (C + D ** J) ))

Besides, if you don't like RPN, use all the parentheses you want :~)
-- 
## Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ 1-201-949-0705 ihnp4!ho95c!wcs