[Maxima] [sage-devel] elliptic_e(0.5, 0.1) differs from Mathematica 7 by about 0.04%.

William Stein wstein at gmail.com
Mon Aug 10 09:02:54 CDT 2009

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:02 AM, Dr. David Kirkby
<david.kirkby at onetel.net>wrote:

> Valery Pipin wrote:
> > William Stein wrote:
> > <<sorry, it's too long> >
> >
> >>> I've no idea how the Sage group would feel about switches lisps. Given
> >>> they have just recently done that (I forgot what was used before),
> there
> >>> might not be too much enthusiasm for it.
> >> Since you have no idea, perhaps I should clarify:  There is no way in
> hell
> >> we are switching from ECL to anything else.
> >>
> >> ECL is massively better than CLISP, and is also the *only* other lisp
> that
> >> is currently supported and builds 100% from source code.   Both CMUCL
> and
> >> SBCL are immediately ruled out just because of that reason.  This is one
> of
> >> the DoD requirements for Sage -- they absolutely will never consider
> using
> >> CMUCL or SBCL (I have asked).
> > Too bad :-). Sbcl builds from the source on the most Unixes at least

Just to be clear -- it does *not* build from source using the GCC compiler
anywhere. It requires an existing common lisp implementation to get
anywhere.  The first sentence of guide to installing SBCL from source says:
"To build SBCL you need a working toolchain and a Common Lisp system  (see
section 2.5 "Supported platforms")."   As a result, SBCL can't be used for
Sage, as mentioned above.   I should also mention that according to
http://sbcl.sourceforge.net/platform-table.html, SBCL doesn't support
Microsoft Windows.

> >> Why do you think cmucl or sbcl would give high performance. Are you
> >>
> >>> suggesting ecl would give lower performance?
> > It is certainly true. Should I write a paper for sage journal about it?
> >
> > best wishes
> > Valery
> I will certainly try Sbcl, even if it can't be used in Sage.
> If SBcl builds on Solaris and gets the right results, it would tend to
> suggest the bug is in ECL, though one would have to admit that is not
> 100% proof (it could be a gcc bug, which only ECL causes).
> I will do this, later today (UK time)
> Dave

+1.  It's a really good idea to try the same code on top of clisp, sbcl, or
whatever, if you have the time.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/attachments/20090810/8a1cd3bf/attachment.htm 

More information about the Maxima mailing list