On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Gabor Grothendieck
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ...Also while Maxima is more sophisticated in terms of algorithms,
Glad to hear it... (I first worked on Maxima in 1971...)
> yacas is actually more sophisticated from the viewpoint of its language which
> borrows ideas from both imperative and prolog programming
It is true that Yacas has a nicer syntax for its pattern-matching
functionality than Maxima, but I think they are fundamentally very
similar. In particular, as far as I can tell, neither does
backtracking or unification, so neither is very Prolog-like.
> and its interfaces are more sophisticated (it is one of the few CAS systems
> that developed an OpenMath interface) and its socket server is
> used by the Ryacas interface.
Maxima interfaces to a variety of other systems via sockets. It does
not have an OpenMath interface (yet!), but I don't know how useful
that is compared to other linearized tree structures.
> yacas can also translate math expressions to TeX and do exact arithmetic.
Maxima can also output TeX and do exact rational arithmetic and
arbitrary-precision floating-point arithmetic. Maxima also handles a
variety of cases which apparently Yacas doesn't, like factorization of
multivariate polynomials (seems pretty basic!), many special
functions, etc. Maxima also has an active user and development
community.
-s
______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
