On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:16:36AM +0200, Corcelle wrote: > > > There are differences in the arithmetic of guile between 1.8* > > and before, due, among others, to the use of gmp. > > It is better not to depend to much on the arithmetic of guile... > > > > Best wishes, --Joris > > Thank you for the precision. > > I use a lot this arithmetic of scheme-guile in the math extension of the > graphics mode. In fact, all the constructions are based on complex operations. > What would be the best solution to go around this problem ? Use another > "engine" for the calculus ?
If you want to stick to scheme, which is probably simplest for what you want, then you can write your own scheme extension for complex arithmetic. > In that case, which one should I choose and would it be as easy as scheme to > use ? > It's true that, in that case, I could have more powerful tools for my > calculations. You may also use any of the TeXmacs plug-ins for doing the computations, e.g. Maxima (or Mathemagix, in a relatively near future). However, the communication is currently text-based, so not very suitable for intensive computations (except if you write all your routines in the plug-in). For the moment, Scheme is probably the best solution. You may also experiment a bit with the goops, an object oriented extension of Guile which will allow you to overload mathematical operations, such as +, -, *, etc. For the moment, I do not use it, but it might be worth to investigate how robust it is. Best wishes, --Joris _______________________________________________ Texmacs-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
