[Maxima] recent attempt

Richard Fateman fateman at cs.berkeley.edu
Thu Jan 4 00:04:55 CST 2007



> -----Original Message-----
> From: maxima-bounces at math.utexas.edu [mailto:maxima-
> bounces at math.utexas.edu] On Behalf Of sen1 at math.msu.edu
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 1:32 PM
> To: Raymond Toy
> Cc: maxima at math.utexas.edu; Robert Dodier
> Subject: Re: [Maxima] recent attempt
> 
> I hope I am not miunderstanding this thread.
> 
> 1. Richard proposed some suggestions for making the lapack (and other
>     numerical routines) fast.
> 
> 2. It seems that some of his suggestions might be hard to implement,
>     (e.g., the ddmatrix or something similar)
>     given the current state of maxima source code.
> 
> 3. Perhaps the ensuing discussion simply made alternate proposals
>     which would not have a degrading effect on the speed of the final
>     routines.  If so, that is fine.
> 
>     If not, then
>       I would rather see things done right (even if it takes longer to
>       implement).
> 
>     Otherwise, I don't see the point for real utility.  Serious users
>     will simply go to octave, python, matlab, etc. or some other tool
>     after possibly doing some testing in maxima.
> 
> -sen
> 

There has been some suggestion (repeated recently) that by using the common
lisp object system at least some of the confusing multiplicity of options in
Maxima can be handled more systematically, and that new features could be
added more easily.  I believe that this concept can be over-sold (it almost
always is when writing computer algebra "systems" in C++), but that it has
some validity.  A package for doing generic arithmetic that could be
modified for use in Maxima is on my web site, in case anyone cares to look
at it. It is in draft form at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~fateman/generic 

Comments are welcome.

RJF


More information about the Maxima mailing list