On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Burcin Erocal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 07:12:27 -0700 (PDT) > parisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I still do not understand why giac is not even mentionned in the >> symbolic discussion considering the fact that like ginac, it is a C++ >> library, but unlike ginac (Ginac Is Not A Cas), giac (Giac Is A Cas) >> has much more advanced calculus functions (either functionnalities >> like limits, integration) and good benchmarks. > > I think the only reason giac is not mentioned in the benchmarks is that > it wasn't available. There are already interfaces to MMA and Maple from > Sage, so they are easy to time. Sympy and sympycore are already in > Python, so no trouble there. GiNaC was easy to build and understand, so > I could create packages and write an interface in a matter of hours. > > There was already an attempt (by Ondrej) to make a package for giac, > which is the first step to writing an interface. However, IIRC, it > didn't succeed.
It did: http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/40abd4b2825c0331/ giac builds, but it takes 72, while pynac takes 2 minutes. Also noone has tried to write the Cython wrappers for it, I hoped Bernard would try it, but I really don't have time for this now. Ondrej --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
