[Maxima] Typos and Questions

Martin RUBEY rubey@labri.fr
Sun, 22 Sep 2002 23:24:52 +0200 (CEST)


after my first experiences with maxima a year ago I didn't have any time
to spend on it, now I tried it again (new university, no MMA) and was, in
fact, rather pleased. I thought I'd just write up some simple 
observations, sorry I can't contribute more at this time...  

Thanks for your work, it's just great!


Line 230 of maxima.1 should read

Maxima. If gnuplot is available, it can be used by setting a plot

instead of

Maxima. If is gnuplot is available, it can be used by setting a plot


Page 3 of the Maximabook:
Line 187 of maxima.tex should probably read

\chapter{Trig through Calculus}

instead of

\chapter{Trig through Through Calculus}


Page 66 of the Maximabook:
Line 69 of prog.tex should read

with input or output commands.  The input is provided through

instead of

with input or output commands.  The input is provide through


local(func) should be emphasised in the documentation, i.e., it wasn't
intuitively clear to me that

block([func],func(x):=x^2); defines func globally,

and it takes some time to find out.


In MMA and I believe in Maple too, I can say

f[3]:=5 and the like,

in Maxima it seems, that the easiest way to do this is


Am I right?


Is there a obvious way to convert arrays, matrices and lists (of the right
form) into each other or do I have to loop over all the indices?


The docu says

 - Function: DEFINE (f(x1, ...), body)
     is equivalent to f(x1,...):="body but when used inside functions
     it happens at execution time rather than at the time of definition
     of the function which contains it.

Asside from the fact that " should (globally, at least also in
"Introduction to Command Line") be replaced by '',


 f(x) := f[x]





so, it seems that this is not really an equivalence. In fact, it seems to
me that '' doen't do anything in this context. Furthermore

g():= f(x):=''Block([],local(f),Map(lambda([x,y],f[x]:y),[1,3,5],[2,5,1]),f[x]);

(as well as the same statement without '' ) makes g(); return


(and now f is defined), while


makes g(); return


(which is what I expected) So, I think the docu should say something like

 - Function: DEFINE (f(x1, ...), body)
     is equivalent to f(x1,...):=evaluated_body, where evaluated_body is
     the evaluation of body.



Erf should accept complex arguments

Why doesn't Integrate(...), numer; call Romberg(...); ?