On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 7:47 AM, David Kirkby <[email protected]>wrote:

> On 28 December 2012 14:53, Emmanuel Charpentier
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Note to (potential) users of the sage interface to Mathematica :
> something
> > seems to have changed in Mathematica version 9 interface with "the rest
> of
> > the world".
> >
> > Setup(s) : Debian wheezy with self-compiled sage v 5.4.1 then v 5.5,
> > Mathematica Linux 64 bits V8 then V9.
> > (1) sage v 5.4 <--> Mathematica V8 : OK
> > (2)sage v 5.5 <--> Mathematica V9 : doesn't work. Sage reports to be
> "unable
> > to start Mathematica". However, Mathematica works both from the command
> line
> > (math) or from the GUI (mathematica).
> > (3) sage v 5.5 <--> Mathematica V8 : OK again.
> >
> > I've also seen (1) and (3) on a smallish 32 bit machine (Again, debian
> > wheezy + self-compiled sage (this was slooow..)).
> >
> > Shouldn't I open a ticket on this ?
>
> It would be best to open a ticket.
>
> > Hints on further relevant information ?
>
> IMHO, the way Sage calls Mathematica is not optimal. I recall opening
> a ticket before, when Sage would not work with my version of
> Mathematica. It turns out that the optional interfaces like
> Mathematica were not tested regularly - I don't know if that has
> changed.
>
> If you look at this post a month or so by me:
>
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!searchin/sage-devel/mathematica$20kirkby/sage-devel/tF5QApfHUHE/3FRgjYrg1QsJ
>
> you will see I had intended emailing something to the FSF and Wolfram
> Research to try to get a better way of interfacing to Mathematica.
> What responses were received from Sage developers, were negative, so I
> never bothered emailing Wolfram Research or the FSF.
>
> Technically the best way to produce an interface will be using the
> MathLink protocol in Mathematica. The issue is the license condictions
>



> of this. It can be used free for commerical use, but not for
> commerical use. This conflicts with the GPL, though I'm not convinced
>


I disagree.  The only reason Sage doesn't have an interface to Mathematica
written using the MathLink protocol is that nobody has got around to
writting such an interface. I would like to strongly encourage people to
write one.

As long as we *only* implement something in Sage that speaks the Mathlink
*protocol*, there are no GPL issues here, since there is no binary linking
between Sage and any Mathematica code.   You can implement from scratch
absolutely any TCP protocol you want in a GPL'd program.     (I'm not
talking about writing a Cython binding to a Wolfram library, but writing an
implementation of the protocol directly in Python.)

 -- William


> that could not be circulated if the interface was an optional
> component, that did not by default link to the Mathematica libraries.
>
> There is an open-source (GPL) program called 'jmath'
>
> http://robotics.caltech.edu/~radford/jmath/
>
> which links to Mathematica in a way that is technially better. Exactly
> what the legal situation of that is, I don't know, and if you read the
> authors comments, he had conflicting answers from different sources.
> That was why I intended emailing the FSF and Wolfram Research. But as
> I say, all comments were negative.
>
> Dave
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sage-support" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support?hl=en.
>
>
>


-- 
William Stein
Professor of Mathematics
University of Washington
http://wstein.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-support" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support?hl=en.


Reply via email to