Bill Page wrote:

>>> FriCAS is fundamentally a strongly-typed *algebraic*
>>> system but it seems to me that the concept of conditional
>>> expressions leads in another direction involving symbolic
>>> manipulation and logic.
>>>       
I'm not quite sure, Waldek explains that the shape of conditional 
expressions is a ring.

Waldek wrote
>> IMHO we need all of them: algebraic part, symbolic manipulation,
>> logic and numerical computations.  Refusing promising approach
>> on ideological reasons would be very wrong precedent.
>>     
Even (and mainly) basic mathematics need all theses parts.
Progress in pan_axioms about vector spaces (last year) and emacs 
interface transforms axiom in a much better computer algebra system.

Some progress in trigonometric functions (about the automatic and 
irritant asin sin x = x) is for me the last? lock which limits my use of 
axioms in a classroom. I hope a tasteful way will be found.

And I agree with Bill when he wrote :
>> But I am quite convinced that one of the strengths of FriCAS (alias Axiom) 
>> is the ways in which it differs from other current computer algebra systems. 
>> For me it is the strongly typed algebraic-oriented language of FriCAS that 
>> sets it
>> apart and makes it of great interest to me.
Only? algebraic structure allows to prove that a result is right. Fuzzy 
rewriting rules aren't enough. It's the reason why I prefer to use axiom 
to other systems.
>> Of course this is viewing FriCAS as a research-oriented platform rather than 
>> as a merely a tool for doing mathematics by computer but I think there are 
>> other open source options available for simply "doing mathematics by 
>> computer"
>> that are already significantly more advanced than FriCAS and FriCAS
>> has very little possibility to "catch-up" with these developments.
>>     
Bill, you endure the questions I ask about axiom.
I don't see any other system which is really right for doing mathematics 
by computer. Mathematica is too expensive and Maple concept too cheap. 
Other open source systems I know are too Maple like.

I find quite important to get a right reponse to
solve (a^2*x+1=x+a, x) with 3 cases a=1, a=-1 and else.

Usual cas reponse x=(a-1)/(a^2-1)=1/(a+1) is irrelavant, but mupad (now 
scilab) could do it.

F.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to