Dear Tim, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Second, I think we need to concentrate on having a comprehensive > test mechanism for the algebra that will alert us to things we > break. I'm concerned that "obvious" fixes in one domain end up > introducing "non-obvious" breakage in another. It is not obvious > how to do this. Yes it is: make Christian Aistleitners AldorUnit available. Please, do not try to invent the wheel yet another time. I'm not going to do it on my own, but I can help, if someone starts it. I'm sure Christian will help, too. > Future plans are to look at updating the algebra, do a review of > the outstanding bugs, and a review of the complaints and comments > posted to the mailing list archives. It would be useful if other > people did the same and, hopefully, create a diff-Naur patch. Those bugs on issue tracker I know how to fix are fixed. The others are difficult, i.e., need better organization of the categories, or need a better compiler, i.e., Aldor. Apart from that, don't believe that the algebra code of Axiom would be especially good. I'm not saying it's bad, but it is *far* behind MuPAD's, for example. The way to fix this is * reorganize old categories (for example, implement the missing bits of PFE) * implement new, "good" domains. I believe, for many many mathematicians, domains for algebraic differential equations and a related class of recurrence relations would be very helpful. Implementing provisos for the EXPR domain would also be very good, but perhaps not as easy. * implement algorithms which are known to be very effective, like Gruntz's for limits, work of Bernhard Gittenberger et al. for asymptotic expansions, work of Carsten Schneider for summation, etc. I think the first two items are easier, and will assist in work on the third item. Martin _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
