<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A Purely Functional Computer Algebra System Embedded in Haskell · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1807.01456/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1807.01456/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A Purely Functional Computer Algebra System Embedded in Haskell — mentioned by antonvs</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35322716</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1807.01456:35322716</guid><pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2023 04:00:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the correction and info. I have to retract my claim about the reason those languages use FEXPRs, but I&amp;#x27;m not convinced they&amp;#x27;re good reasons. There are, however, very good reasons why the FEXPR approach has been abandoned by other languages, as the Pitman article points out. There are certainly better ways to achieve pretty much anything you might want FEXPR-style source code access for. Aside from the Lisp world, there are things like Template Haskell, Rust macros, Ocaml&amp;#x27;s Camlp4/5, etc. But you don&amp;#x27;t even need a macro-like system to implement most of the kinds of features in…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1807.01456/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.SC</category></item></channel></rss>
