On Oct 2, 5:32 pm, Fredrik Johansson fredrik.johans...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 12:58 AM, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
Reading the bug report it seemed to me that the code was determining
in some way that terms could be dropped off the sum because they were
too small
to construct polynomials that are
difficult to factor.
I dunno about the Sage wrapper problem. If that's the difficulty,
maybe the subject line is wrong.
RJF
On Oct 1, 1:21 am, Andy Novocin a...@novocin.com wrote:
By the way, last October I made a patch for NTL which makes NTL's
factoring
I think that some of the suggestions here pretty much miss the mark.
If you want to have Maxima do the same thing as Mathematica's Reduce
program
(and, by the way I think this would be good, especially since
Mathematica's Reduce
program seems to have been improved substantially so it is a store-
appropriate resources, but that should be followed on sage-flame.
RJF
On Sep 20, 7:41 am, Bjarke Hammersholt Roune bjarke.ro...@gmail.com
wrote:
I wanted to spark a discussion about this because I have a perception
that it has not been discussed in a non-inflammatory way, and talking
about
it seems to me that gradef in maxima does what you want. If you want
to re-implement the facility in your own system, why not implement
gradef?
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from
It doesn't usually make sense to have two different global symbols
x with different types, so Maurizio is right, I think.
Also, Maxima will provide only one global symbol, and it should not
have conflicting declarations or assumptions, but these cannot always
be checked for consistency.
This
and Cython and now , oh, let's add a postfix !.)
But what I think is appropriate here is an explicit formulation about
what you are doing, either (a)(e) or something else, and the
consequences.
RJF
On Aug 29, 10:13 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:10 AM
have a different take on it, if it actually has
generators for omitted terms.
A few weeks programming can save 30 minutes in the library.
RJF
On Aug 29, 12:53 am, jonhanke jonha...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi William,
Thanks for the clarification. To start the discussion, let me ask if
there is a good
On Aug 27, 5:16 pm, Juanjo juanjose.garciarip...@googlemail.com
wrote:
On Aug 27, 11:24 pm, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
perhaps ECL does not have something like schedule-finalization. I
think this is present in CMUCL, SBCL, Lispworks, and AllegroCL, at least.
ECL does have
after.
A complete Allegro coding of this is online in my generic lisp
arithmetic package.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel-unsubscr
It's nice that the labels issue has been resolved. It is fairly
implausible that a user would
type in 32,000 individual commands, so optimizing a search was an
obvious issue.
Of course lisp has hash tables. Also arrays.
The idea that you were generating tens of thousands of symbols -- in
On Aug 27, 11:59 am, Nils Bruin nbr...@sfu.ca wrote:
On Aug 27, 9:07 am, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
Let GMP do its own memory allocation. After Lisp has itself allocated
a structure S with a pointer to a GMP-allocated object, it knows what
to do: either S is
used or not, determined
through this search 4 times or so [bad programming unless you assume
it is of trivial length]
it does not seem to me that this would matter entirely so much.
But then I'm sure that Maxima does not have enough cupholders...
RJF
On Aug 27, 1:03 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote
on the variable k. Or would that be
k.type ?
I personally find the latter syntax to be ugly, and conflict inducing,
e.g. A.B also means some kind of multiplication, 3.4 does not mean
multiplication but 34/100, approximately. etc.
RJF
On Aug 21, 5:36 am, Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote
this.
Another possibility is to always insist on substitution semantic
rather than evaluation. Watch out for loops.
Evaluation and related things are discussed in published articles (one
by me, as it happens.)
RJF
On Aug 19, 1:09 pm, Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Aug 19, 8
Plotting algebraic curves == an application to pure math? Is that what
sympy is about?
factoring is used in simplifying expressions in an attempt to reformat
them for easier comprehension.
Factoring is used by solve in the obvious way to separate solutions
exactly.
Factoring is sometimes used
))/dx^2 notation for derivatives, where the derivative is
definitely NOT with respect to x^2.
Blame Newton, I think, or maybe Leibniz?
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group
hope you can straighten this out before you present your results at
your conference.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
did you mean to integrate with respect to x^2 ?
Well, x^2 doesn't occur in f(x). So let's rename x^2 as y.
What is the integral of f(x) with respect to y?
It is y*f(x).
substituting back x^2 for y, you get x^2*f(x).
Or did you mean something else? Certainly Maxima expects the variable
of
Let's see, in sage then you have the following syntax.
(x,y) means a list
f(x,y) means a function application
(x+y) means grouping for arithmetic.
RationalField(x) means, uh, sortof in indeterminate...
Integer(4) means, uh, set the type? force a coercion?
Are there any other distinct uses
with this ---).
RJF
On Aug 18, 8:37 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
On Aug 18, 2009, at 6:55 PM, Golam Mortuza Hossain wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 9:27 PM, William Steinwst...@gmail.com
wrote:
--
sage: f(x) = function('f',x)
sage: f(x).integral(x
On Aug 18, 6:48 pm, Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:42 PM, rjffate...@gmail.com wrote:
did you mean to integrate with respect to x^2 ?
Yes.
Well then, since you meant to do that, what response would you
consider correct?
An error message,
some light into the Sage
discussion;
it only descends to snarkiness because I am inclined to sarcasm and
don't
manage to edit it all out.
RJF
I'll store it in my memory banks
and come back to it later if I have a need for it.
Bill
not such a great plan.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com
On Aug 17, 2:00 pm, gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
7. I have no problem with summer-of-code high school or college or ...
students writing programs. Relying on this code as part of the core of
a system is however not such a great plan.
RJF
I allowed myself to answer
On Aug 16, 3:30 pm, Bill Hart goodwillh...@googlemail.com wrote:
..snip...
{RJF] (mpfr::with-temps (/(- (* (- (* 2 i)1) x t1) (* (- i 1) t0)) i)))
That's a very interesting example. Are you saying that Lisp
automatically divines which MPFR functions to assign to those
operators
.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage
wow, I post one place and it comes out in two places...
Here is an amplification about the comments on GMP and GMPY.
From the perspective of Sage and python, I just took a look at the
current gmpy.
The documentation, which has not apparently been updated since 2003,
says
Early tests have
.]
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage
Regarding shipping 2 lisps:
I thought Sage already knew how to ship a kit for CLISP, because that
is what Sage was using for Maxima a year ago.
So the Sage project is already building the second lisp from scratch
now, voluntarily. ECL.
But you don't really have to generally ship 2 lisps, it
On Aug 10, 10:21 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:09 PM, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
On Aug 10, 2:00 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
(RJF) Could you perhaps quote for us
there are other requirements. (I
have, in the past, received funding from DARPA, Office of Naval
Research, Army Research Office, as well as other non-DoD sources.)
Thanks
RJF
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel
On Aug 10, 2:00 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
(RJF) Could you perhaps quote for us the DoD requirements? (and who in DoD
requires them).
(William) No, I definitely can't. Sorry I can't go into any further
I think it is worth pointing out that
(a) The bug found is a static typing error in which a program which,
in some circumstance, would do a list operation on
an argument which is an integer.
(b) This line of code in Maxima has probably been there for 35 years,
and so far as anyone knows, that
I glanced at the document and at William's response. Here are a few
observations.
1. No native Windows version seems to me to be a big issue, but it has
never been
clear to me how hard it is for an ordinary user (not admin) to install
emulation software,
on a perhaps shared machine to run (or
On Jul 25, 1:19 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
... snip...
(RJF) 2. The reason for the recommended choice of language is to avoid
languages with long tool chains.
(RB) I don't think this was the primary motive--qualities like easy to
learn, easy to read
, is that the data they collected
showed the students really didn't want to do this computer stuff. And
from this, the authors took an enormous leap of faith to conclude that
therefore the programs should be improved.
Cheers
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group
Microsoft has as its premise the idea
that they would like to say that machines running MS Windows are
really good for running Sage.
Careful about have Sage folded in to someone's marketing brochure..
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage
was freely given away, makes no sense.
RJF
ps. It seems to me that 99% of the discussion of GPL on the internet
is ill-informed, naive, repetitive, pointless or all of the above.
On Jul 14, 5:30 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Ondrej Certikond
about
BSD software re-use, so I would consider this (don't understand)^2.
RJF
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more
on Maxima in the last 12 months has covered the
same ground, with impulses and piecewise defined functions.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr
; that could be done in Python) then
they could claim DoE Maxima ran in Python (or on top of Python).
This would of course be a possible project for Sage-central, too.
Silly, but not as silly as rewriting Maxima in python ab initio.
RJF
algorithms merged in some way, including some
novelties, like variable precision arithmetic and symbolic analysis.
You could try to duplicate that, but it would not be just a matter
of
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel
if I find a problem in them!
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http
allowing (a,b,c) to be a list of 3 items means that
(x+y) could either be a list of one item, namely x+y
or the expression x+y itself.
So it is probably a bad idea unless you think that singleton lists are
the same as their first element.
And I suspect that you don't want to think that.
RJF
the way most programming language grammars work, those based on so-
called context-free grammars, it is important to avoid ambiguity, and
to have constructions that can be parsed regardless of context.
thus
x+y means the same as
(x)+y in most programming languages.
now consider
around it, Bondarenko is not interested in work-
arounds. He is not interested in the result of this computation, which
was probably artificially generated by randomly clumping together
stuff. He is interested in finding bugs.
RJf
On Jul 4, 10:44 pm, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net
wrote
It's possible to dismiss the result of the survey because of the low
participation level, or to dismiss the results because of a hypothesis
that the respondents already KNOW Sage and want to know something
else.
But I suspect that there is also an underlying current of simple lack
of interest in
On Jun 25, 1:10 pm, gsw georgswe...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
I suspect you're just running out of RAM.
Not necessarily physically, but the construction Sage -- expect
interface -- Maxima -- Lisp implementation is a fragile one. If the
Lisp implementation thinks it runs out of space, this
version than the one packaged with Sage) and see what
happens.
RJF
On Jun 25, 9:14 am, Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org wrote:
Hi Brendan,
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:58:59 -0400
Brendan Rooney broo...@uwaterloo.ca wrote:
Hello
I am currently attempting to use sage to research graph polynomials
On Jun 10, 5:57 am, Dr. David Kirkby david.kir...@onetel.net
wrote:
Harald Schilly wrote:
Nice and interesting article on everything2.com about free maths
software, a presentation by wolfram about mathematica and thoughts
about the reason, why mathematica is still tolerated. Link to Sage
., symbolic integration.
would be a huge waste of human effort, considering that the algorithms
in Maxima are still being improved, 40 years later.
There are still minor typos that I noticed.
RJF
On Jun 5, 3:56 am, Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote:
before i forget, while looking
I'm not saying every polynomial multiplication program can be shown to
be correct; just the method I suggested happens to be pretty simple.
If you write a polynomial multiplication program that has certain
breakpoints, e.g. switching to a different method like Karatsuba or
FFT at size 3000, then
, Rob Beezer goo...@beezer.cotse.net wrote:
On May 4, 5:03 pm, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
You might find this paper interesting, since it discusses the linkage
of an interactive graphics system (for graphs) to a computer algebra
system.
Hi Richard,
Thanks for including
of code it took to implement.
Sorry, not in python.
There are also comments about GraphViz etc. It's not the only
program.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage
to following the pure
rather than the polluted track?)
...
It seems like you view Sage as a waste of effort, since it is new.
(RJF) Well, if you exactly replaced Maxima by writing it over in Python,
Yes. It would be a waste of effort.
This rewrite definitely has potential
who are less clever and capable who
offer designs and implementations of features, or fixes that may be
best avoided. The more of these you have (hundreds?) the worse off you
may be.
(RJF) I hope these comments, negative as they may seem, provide some help
in formulating your position paper
The argument (specious, probably) is that if the compiler is open-
source
as well as the library, the operating system code etc, then an
industrious person
could try to verify all this.
It is often said that Testing can only demonstrate the presence of a
bug, not its absence.
BUT
I think it
verification, testing, debugging. These topics are covered in some
computer science courses.
RJF
On Apr 30, 11:21 am, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 11:06 AM, mark mcclure mcmcc...@unca.edu wrote:
On Apr 29, 1:37 pm, William Stein wst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 29
can.
Different people approach this in other ways. Wolfram, for example,
claims he could improve the situation as well as make money for
himself by leaving academia, starting a company, and building
software. Like Alpha, which oddly enough appears in the subject line
of this message. :)
RJF
as they may seem, provide some help
in formulating your position paper.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit
for export
to (say) North Korea, Burma, Cuba, or China.
I don't know if this is has been overlooked,
or, as I would certainly prefer, has been resolved satisfactorily and
is not of concern.
Classifying Maxima (essentially) as a munition seems
counterproductive.
Cheers.
RJF
. The
(student?) would prefer to replace Maxima with Ginac because
there is more programmers on C++ than Lisp, so more people would
enhance the tool. This approach is the one I prefer.
On that basis we should write programs in Chinese. There are so many
more... :)
RJF
On Apr 5, 9:06 am, Golam Mortuza Hossain gmhoss...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Robert Bradshaw
rober...@math.washington.edu wrote:
On Apr 3, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Nick Alexander wrote:
(1) \int dx f(x)
(2) \int f(x) dx
I prefer (2).
I've actually
somewhat to be publication quality.
If this has not occurred to you, consider the display for expressions
m*x+c, x+c*m, e=c^2*m, f=a*m ...
RJF
On Apr 3, 7:16 pm, Nick Alexander ncalexan...@gmail.com wrote:
(1) \int dx f(x)
(2) \int f(x) dx
I prefer (2).
Nick
. Sometimes it does.
RJF
On Mar 29, 10:44 am, Carl Witty carl.wi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 29, 2009 at 5:27 AM, Burcin Erocal bur...@erocal.org wrote:
* We raise an error whenever a function object is specified without
variables.
Comments?
+1 for raising an error.
Carl
ignores the central pure math only computational
parts of Sage, or relegates them to some less-prominent position.
RJF
On Mar 25, 6:32 am, Stan Schymanski schym...@gmail.com wrote:
I am an example for someone that does use both modes. I do symbolic
derivations and transformations and then apply them
how about parsley
package approximating resources (of) sage less extensions (by)
yakisoba.
You might find something better for the last Y. Or for any of it :)
On Mar 19, 2:16 am, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
Hi,
I have a question about how to name the Sage derived distribution
Lisp.
3. The program by Manuel Bronstein (PMINT) already exists in Maxima
code, and so incorporating it into Sage would be as simple as loading
it in to the Maxima image that already accompanies Sage.
I hope you have a good summer.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post
see
http://scienceblogs.com/commonknowledge/2009/02/sage_-_open_access_data_from_m.php
sorry you will have to patch the url above. or use google to
search for { sage merck}
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel
1. Imagine if Merck had called their biology database Mathematica.
2. Maybe this Sage should provide access to that Sage.
3. For people who like to grouse about sage, perhaps there should be
a hold on the url 's involving centrocercus .. Try googling.
RJF
this make everyone happy? Probably not.
RJF
On Feb 26, 3:26 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
On Feb 26, 2009, at 2:54 PM, Mike Hansen wrote:
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 2:52 PM, YannLC
yannlaiglecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for the explanation.
I definitely
wanted x to disappear.
If Sage just uses Maxima, you might want to know about these options.
If Sage is re-inventing this kind of
facility, you might find this worth either emulating or explicitly
rejecting for something else.
RJF
On Feb 19, 2:43 pm, Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote
On Feb 13, 2:30 am, Simon King k...@mathematik.uni-jena.de wrote:
Hi all,
On Feb 13, 10:09 am, Stan Schymanski schym...@gmail.com wrote:
rjf wrote:
If there is an algorithm for simplify_full(), then presumably it could
be programmed in Lisp, and incorporated in Maxima.
You
of it?
RJF
On Feb 11, 11:11 am, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Feb 11, 9:45 am, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
There are of course several trac tickets related to this, so this is
not a bug report (for Sage or for Maxima), but I had to laugh when
this came up today
.
On Feb 12, 12:27 am, Simon King k...@mathematik.uni-jena.de wrote:
On Feb 12, 7:23 am, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
How much work do you think Maxima should do to try to determine for
arbitrary f, if f(x)0 or not?
Perhaps the same amount of work as for the successful solution
On Feb 12, 7:50 am, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, I don't think this is as much of a bug as people think - rjf was
quite wise to ask what my command was!
sage: t=var('t')
sage: sqrt((-m*sin(m*t))^2+(n*cos(n*t))^2).nintegral(x,0,2*pi)
where m, n were determined in an interact
On Feb 12, 8:01 am, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Feb 12, 7:50 am, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
SNIP
.
At the very least we know Sage has its work cut out for it if it ever
wants to remove dependence on the slow-slow interface to Maxima and
Lisp issues, because
results date to about 1968.
RJF
On Feb 11, 11:11 am, mabshoff mabsh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Feb 11, 9:45 am, kcrisman kcris...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
There are of course several trac tickets related to this, so this is
not a bug report (for Sage or for Maxima), but I had to laugh when
, At that price, no wonder!.
)
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com
On Jan 22, 6:26 pm, mhampton hampto...@gmail.com wrote:
...
A python/
cython/javascript spreadsheet for the Sage notebook would be great -
unfortunately I'm not going to write one. I think it would be hard to
do it right.
-M. Hampton
I have heard that the major competition for
On Jan 21, 10:25 pm, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
On Jan 21, 2009, at 3:34 PM, rjf wrote:
On Jan 21, 11:54 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
... snip...
In our case, linear
algebra is done via NumPy, which in turn uses a BLAS (with Sage we
On Jan 21, 2:44 am, Harald Schilly harald.schi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 21, 6:21 am, rjf fate...@gmail.com wrote:
In my experience, people doing scientific calculations for a living
will not tolerate a language implementation X whose programs are
substantially slower than equivalent
On Jan 21, 11:54 am, Robert Bradshaw rober...@math.washington.edu
wrote:
I am sure that some Sage people have thought about such things, but
probably not
enough. Which is why I try to poke holes in some of these comments!
Sage has thought about this--we have models for both:
RDF --
of ignorant of programming
language technology. Perhaps
he means interactive rather than interpreted?
Or perhaps he means that for the last 50+ years since 1956, all those
people who thought
they were doing scientific computing in FORTRAN uh, really couldn't
have been doing that at all?
RJF
On Jan 20, 5:15 pm, Luiz Felipe Martins luizfelipe.mart...@gmail.com
wrote:
My understanding is that, since Python is based on C, it is IEEE-754
compliant (as long as the CPU is, which I think is true for all the
modern CPUs).
There are many ways of being compliant with IEEE-754. If Sage
for removing a chocolate
stain from your clothes. The final step, if nothing you have tried
removes the chocolate, consider dunking the entire garment in melted
chocolate and turning it all into chocolate color.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group
pretty dense material; PhD dissertations by Bronstein,
Trager, Davenport, Rothstein, Rioboo, Cherry, ... so that might take,
oh, a few hours by one of the top 10 Sage developers ?
Happy new year.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage
So far as I can tell, the original computation in Maxima was
(fc_all(n):=fc_ab(-1,n,-%pi,(-%pi)/2)+fc_ab(2,n,-%pi/2,0)
+fc_ab(-1,n,0,%pi/2)+fc_ab(2,n,%pi/2,%pi),
fc_ab(e,n,a,b):=if n = 0 then [integrate(e,x,a,b)/(2*%pi),0]
else fc1_ab(e,n,a,b),
My guess, and it is only a guess since I do not use CLISP, is the
following:
The allocation of floating-point number memory is too small, and you
are using it up,
so you are triggering garbage collections.
One possible fix: allocate more float memory in CLISP. See if that
changes timing.
Well, you have been happy running clisp, even though it is
substantially slower than GCL.
ECL is presumably faster than clisp, but that is not even remotely
surprising since clisp
is a byte-code interpreter.
I don't know what you mean by the boehm_gc is the best of breed
garbage collector.
They say that everyone is entitled to an opinion. At least in the
election off-years.
consider how to evaluate
3+ 4/(5+1/0).Would you say that was equal to 3, or would you make
the system barf?
RJF
On Oct 10, 10:11 am, Burcin Erocal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:11:04
try to make it faster.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
. An interesting commentary if in fact Sage, in
this instance, is strictly less expressive than Maxima.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
the difficulties of dealing
with assumptions (in Macsyma, Mathematica, Maple).
Duplicating these systems will duplicate the difficulties.
RJF
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send
It might be worth observing that the Department of Energy was happy to
supply DOE Macsyma to Bill Schelter or to anyone else (except Fidel
Castro) on almost any terms, non-exclusively They gave Bill
permission to redistribute under GPL, because that was what Bill
requested. DOE did not ask
of sage-devel will, too. Perhaps you could start a blog and
people can read about it there?
--tom
On Tue, 27 May 2008, rjf wrote:
See the response to a small part of this in a separate thread on open-
source and proofs (unless the moderator removes that message.).
I joined sage
oh well. I'll try to respond civilly.
.. big snip..
[RJF] I really don't care about Magma. I know that some mathematicians do.
This rather vague statement I think might signal a different between
philosophies.
I did not mean to be vague. I know that some mathematicians want to
do
To the vast majority of users, Linux is just as much a black box as
Windows.
Indeed, I think my Tivo DVR runs Linux, and in principle I have access
to the
source, but I would no more consider trying to fix a bug in it than I
would
remove my own appendix.
Given the whole range of programs and
I sent a note to boothby, asking that he forward it to sage-devel if
my cc didn't work, which it didn't. But he didn't forward it. That's
ok, I guess.
In the unlikely event that you want to read the whole back-and-forth,
please contact me or Tom.
But there is one point that I think is worth
501 - 600 of 603 matches
Mail list logo
