You can subscribe to this list here.
2002 
_{Jan}

_{Feb}

_{Mar}

_{Apr}

_{May}

_{Jun}
(67) 
_{Jul}
(61) 
_{Aug}
(49) 
_{Sep}
(43) 
_{Oct}
(59) 
_{Nov}
(24) 
_{Dec}
(18) 

2003 
_{Jan}
(34) 
_{Feb}
(35) 
_{Mar}
(72) 
_{Apr}
(42) 
_{May}
(46) 
_{Jun}
(15) 
_{Jul}
(64) 
_{Aug}
(62) 
_{Sep}
(22) 
_{Oct}
(41) 
_{Nov}
(57) 
_{Dec}
(56) 
2004 
_{Jan}
(48) 
_{Feb}
(47) 
_{Mar}
(33) 
_{Apr}
(39) 
_{May}
(6) 
_{Jun}
(17) 
_{Jul}
(19) 
_{Aug}
(10) 
_{Sep}
(14) 
_{Oct}
(74) 
_{Nov}
(80) 
_{Dec}
(22) 
2005 
_{Jan}
(43) 
_{Feb}
(33) 
_{Mar}
(52) 
_{Apr}
(74) 
_{May}
(32) 
_{Jun}
(58) 
_{Jul}
(18) 
_{Aug}
(41) 
_{Sep}
(71) 
_{Oct}
(28) 
_{Nov}
(65) 
_{Dec}
(68) 
2006 
_{Jan}
(54) 
_{Feb}
(37) 
_{Mar}
(82) 
_{Apr}
(211) 
_{May}
(69) 
_{Jun}
(75) 
_{Jul}
(279) 
_{Aug}
(139) 
_{Sep}
(135) 
_{Oct}
(58) 
_{Nov}
(81) 
_{Dec}
(78) 
2007 
_{Jan}
(141) 
_{Feb}
(134) 
_{Mar}
(65) 
_{Apr}
(49) 
_{May}
(61) 
_{Jun}
(90) 
_{Jul}
(72) 
_{Aug}
(53) 
_{Sep}
(86) 
_{Oct}
(61) 
_{Nov}
(62) 
_{Dec}
(101) 
2008 
_{Jan}
(100) 
_{Feb}
(66) 
_{Mar}
(76) 
_{Apr}
(95) 
_{May}
(77) 
_{Jun}
(93) 
_{Jul}
(103) 
_{Aug}
(76) 
_{Sep}
(42) 
_{Oct}
(55) 
_{Nov}
(44) 
_{Dec}
(75) 
2009 
_{Jan}
(103) 
_{Feb}
(105) 
_{Mar}
(121) 
_{Apr}
(59) 
_{May}
(103) 
_{Jun}
(82) 
_{Jul}
(67) 
_{Aug}
(76) 
_{Sep}
(85) 
_{Oct}
(75) 
_{Nov}
(181) 
_{Dec}
(133) 
2010 
_{Jan}
(107) 
_{Feb}
(116) 
_{Mar}
(145) 
_{Apr}
(89) 
_{May}
(138) 
_{Jun}
(85) 
_{Jul}
(82) 
_{Aug}
(111) 
_{Sep}
(70) 
_{Oct}
(83) 
_{Nov}
(60) 
_{Dec}
(16) 
2011 
_{Jan}
(61) 
_{Feb}
(16) 
_{Mar}
(52) 
_{Apr}
(41) 
_{May}
(34) 
_{Jun}
(41) 
_{Jul}
(57) 
_{Aug}
(73) 
_{Sep}
(21) 
_{Oct}
(45) 
_{Nov}
(50) 
_{Dec}
(28) 
2012 
_{Jan}
(70) 
_{Feb}
(36) 
_{Mar}
(71) 
_{Apr}
(29) 
_{May}
(48) 
_{Jun}
(61) 
_{Jul}
(44) 
_{Aug}
(54) 
_{Sep}
(20) 
_{Oct}
(28) 
_{Nov}
(41) 
_{Dec}
(137) 
2013 
_{Jan}
(62) 
_{Feb}
(55) 
_{Mar}
(31) 
_{Apr}
(23) 
_{May}
(54) 
_{Jun}
(54) 
_{Jul}
(90) 
_{Aug}
(46) 
_{Sep}
(38) 
_{Oct}
(60) 
_{Nov}
(92) 
_{Dec}
(17) 
2014 
_{Jan}
(62) 
_{Feb}
(35) 
_{Mar}
(72) 
_{Apr}
(26) 
_{May}

_{Jun}

_{Jul}

_{Aug}

_{Sep}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 



1
(4) 
2

3
(1) 
4
(4) 
5
(1) 
6
(6) 
7
(5) 
8

9
(2) 
10
(2) 
11

12
(1) 
13

14

15
(2) 
16
(3) 
17
(2) 
18
(1) 
19
(2) 
20
(1) 
21

22
(1) 
23

24
(3) 
25
(4) 
26
(5) 
27
(3) 
28
(3) 
29

30
(3) 
31
(2) 


From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070506 09:05:52

Bugs item #1713691, was opened at 20070506 11:05 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713691&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Xmaxima or other UI Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Henrik Wallin (e9henrik) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Emaxima package with preview option breaks inline preview Initial Comment: When creating a latex document with inlined math in EMaxima mode, generating a preview in the emacs buffer for the document (Cc Cp Cd) will not generate previews for the inlined math in the text if the [preview] option has been given to \usepackage{emaxima}. Example document: %<example> \documentclass{article} \usepackage[preview]{emaxima} \begin{document} Inlined math test $2^N$, then maxima formula test: \begin{maxima} 'sin(x^2); \maximaoutput* \m \sin x^2 \\ \end{maxima} \end{document} %</example> Typing [Cc Cp Cd] in emacs (previewdocument) will create previews for the maxima outputs, but not for $2^N$. On the other hand, removing [preview] from the line \usepackage[preview]{emaxima} and executing previewdocument will render 2^N correctly (but not the maxima math of course). I use maxima5.10.0 with emaxima.lisp, emaxima.el and emaxima.sty from maxima CVS.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713691&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070505 10:06:39

Bugs item #1713327, was opened at 20070505 03:06 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713327&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Xmaxima or other UI Group: Includes proposed fix Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: fix case mapping for editing keys Initial Comment: This is for windows but it would be the same issue for linux. Issue: Screwy case sensitivity for important accellerator keys. I suspect the xmaxima file gets converted to tcl somehow, but I can't find the expected text inside the xmaxima.exe file. There's a problem, kids and it's that the upper case 'g' won't break out of program and it's the same problem for the edit keys like copy/paste, undo, and whatever else. I'm pretty sure that just duplicating the lines and adding a capital letter will probably compile/translate or somehow convert to the correct tcl code. These keys are defined at line: 3579 bind $w <Controlw> $dismiss add bind $w <ControlW> $dismiss and at line 9239 the alpha could be dealt with the saem way. bind CNtext <Controlg> "CMinterrupt %W " bind CNtext <Controlu> "CNclearinput %W " bind CNtext "\)" "CNblinkMatchingParen %W %A" bind CNtext "\]" "CNblinkMatchingParen %W %A" bind CNtext "\}" "CNblinkMatchingParen %W %A" bind CNtext <Controlj> "tkTextInsert %W %A ; openMathAnyKey %W %K %A" bind CNtext <Altp> "CNpreviousInput $w 1" bind CNtext <Altn> "CNpreviousInput $w 1" bind CNtext <Alts> {sendMaxima %W ":s\n" } bind CNtext <ControlKeyc> {tk_textCopy %W ;break} bind CNtext <ControlKeyx> {tk_textCut %W ;break} bind CNtext <ControlKeyv> {tk_textPaste %W ;break} Again, I can't prove this because it appears thet the xmaxima.exe file uses some other source, perhaps compiled tcl code, but this is what I'd do if I could get it into the exe.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713327&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070504 21:58:21

Bugs item #1713067, was opened at 20070504 15:36 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713067&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: limit/integrate wrong Initial Comment: limit('integrate(t,t,0,x)/x,x,inf); Is 'limit('integrate(t,t,0,x),x,inf) positive, negative, or zero? pos; => 0 Of course the correct answer is INF, since integrate(t,t,0,x)/x == x/2 More complicated examples (correct answer is INF) limit(integrate(t/log(t),t,2,a)/a,a,inf) => 0 limit(integrate(t/log(t),t,x,2*x)/x,x,inf) => 0  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20070504 17:58 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Originator: YES Re the anonymous comments: > Maybe you should try your 1st example without "'" before "integrate": > limit(integrate(t,t,0,x)/x,x,inf); gives the correct answer! Well, of course it does; Maxima can calculate a closed form for that integral. I was using that as a *simple* example of a nounform integral where limit gives the wrong answer. > And for your ´more complicated´ examples: > What other answers do you expect, when Maxima isn´t able to solve the > definite integrals??? First of all, I expect not to get an *incorrect* answer, 0. If Maxima can't calculate the correct answer, it should return a noun form. Secondly, in many cases it is possible to calculate the limit without being able to calculate a closedform integral. For example, limit( integrate( exp(t)/t, t, 1, x) , x, inf) = inf (I'm surprised that integrate(exp(t)/t,t,1,inf) doesn't report it's divergent, but it doesn't...) limit( integrate( t^5/(t^7+log(t)), x, x+1), x, inf) = 0 etc. It turns out that limit doesn't have any special code for integrals like this, but it certainly *could*.  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20070504 16:34 Message: Logged In: NO Maybe you should try your 1st example without "'" before "integrate": limit(integrate(t,t,0,x)/x,x,inf); gives the correct answer! And for your ´more complicated´ examples: What other answers do you expect, when Maxima isn´t able to solve the definite integrals???  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713067&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070504 20:34:54

Bugs item #1713067, was opened at 20070504 12:36 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713067&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: limit/integrate wrong Initial Comment: limit('integrate(t,t,0,x)/x,x,inf); Is 'limit('integrate(t,t,0,x),x,inf) positive, negative, or zero? pos; => 0 Of course the correct answer is INF, since integrate(t,t,0,x)/x == x/2 More complicated examples (correct answer is INF) limit(integrate(t/log(t),t,2,a)/a,a,inf) => 0 limit(integrate(t/log(t),t,x,2*x)/x,x,inf) => 0  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20070504 13:34 Message: Logged In: NO Maybe you should try your 1st example without "'" before "integrate": limit(integrate(t,t,0,x)/x,x,inf); gives the correct answer! And for your ´more complicated´ examples: What other answers do you expect, when Maxima isn´t able to solve the definite integrals???  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713067&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070504 19:36:27

Bugs item #1713067, was opened at 20070504 15:36 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713067&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: limit/integrate wrong Initial Comment: limit('integrate(t,t,0,x)/x,x,inf); Is 'limit('integrate(t,t,0,x),x,inf) positive, negative, or zero? pos; => 0 Of course the correct answer is INF, since integrate(t,t,0,x)/x == x/2 More complicated examples (correct answer is INF) limit(integrate(t/log(t),t,2,a)/a,a,inf) => 0 limit(integrate(t/log(t),t,x,2*x)/x,x,inf) => 0  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1713067&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070504 02:20:17

Bugs item #1692651, was opened at 20070401 21:03 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1692651&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: Fixed Priority: 7 Private: No Submitted By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Assigned to: Barton Willis (willisbl) Summary: MGRP gets sense of comparison backwards Initial Comment: The function MGRP (greaterthan comparison) can get the sense of the comparison backwards. MGRP is called indirectly from MEVALP and maybe other places as well. e.g. ?mgrp (x, 1); => x  1 > 0 (OK) ?mgrp (1, x); => x  1 > 0 (OOPS) I'm pretty sure the cause of this is the use of special variables in src/compar.lisp. I think what's happening is that SIGN1 calls itself, clobbering some of the specials. I believe the right way to fix this is to rework the comparison code to use only lexical variables instead of specials. For the record: (%i1) :lisp (trace sign1) (SIGN1) (%i1) ?mgrp (x, 1); 1> (SIGN1 ((MPLUS SIMP) 1 $X)) <1 (SIGN1 $PNZ) (%o1) x  1 > 0 (%i2) ?mgrp (1, x); 1> (SIGN1 ((MPLUS SIMP) 1 ((MTIMES SIMP) 1 $X))) 2> (SIGN1 1) <2 (SIGN1 $NEG) 2> (SIGN1 $X) <2 (SIGN1 $PNZ) 2> (SIGN1 1) <2 (SIGN1 $NEG) 2> (SIGN1 ((MPLUS SIMP IRREDUCIBLE) 1 $X)) <2 (SIGN1 $PNZ) <1 (SIGN1 $PNZ) (%o2) x  1 > 0  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20070503 19:20 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1312539 Originator: NO This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker).  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20070419 13:06 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=895922 Originator: NO Fixed by CVS revsion 1.23.  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20070413 04:11 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=895922 Originator: NO The calls to infsimp aren't needed  the function sign1 does the infsimp. When 'memq' is restored, I'll patch mgrp and mgqp.  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20070407 10:40 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: YES Barton, thanks for investigating. Please go ahead and commit the new code. I don't understand exactly what is the purpose of MGRP (it seems like it is one of several functions to make comparisons and I don't see how the they all fit together) but I am more than willing to trust your judgement on this one.  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20070405 14:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=895922 Originator: NO I see that memq is no longer in Maxima. Replacing memq with a call to member, and appending an infsimp (may or may not be a good idea, I don't know), I built Maxima CVS using XP and sbcl 1.02. I passes the test suite. The code: (defun mgrp (a b) (setq a (infsimp (sub a b))) (let ((sgn (csign a))) (cond ((eq sgn '$pos) t) ((eq sgn t) nil) ;; csign thinks a  b isn't real ((member sgn '($neg $zero $nz) :test #'eq) nil) (t `((mgreaterp) ,a 0))))) (defun mgqp (a b) (setq a (infsimp (sub a b))) (let ((sgn (csign a))) (cond ((member sgn '($pos $zero $pz) :test #'eq) t) ((eq sgn t) nil) ;; csign thinks a  b isn't real ((eq sgn '$neg) nil) (t `((mgeqp) ,a 0)))))  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20070405 04:16 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=895922 Originator: NO An attempt at a fix: (defun mgrp (a b) (setq a (sub a b)) (let ((sgn (csign a))) (cond ((eq sgn '$pos) t) ((eq sgn t) nil) ;; csign thinks a  b isn't real ((memq sgn '($neg $zero $nz)) nil) (t `((mgreaterp) ,a 0))))) (defun mgqp (a b) (setq a (sub a b)) (let ((sgn (csign a))) (cond ((memq sgn '($pos $zero $pz)) t) ((eq sgn t) nil) ;; csign thinks a  b isn't real ((eq sgn '$neg) nil) (t `((mgeqp) ,a 0))))) Notes: (1) With these functions, the test suite gives an error break on rtest15; rtest16 #39 reports a problem about the sign of infinity; and rtestsum #5 reports that the result is correct, but that Maxima expected the result to be wrong. (2) The functions c$pos and friends may have some logic in them that I've overlooked. (3) The subtraction in my functions can be a problem for inf, minf, und, and ... (4) It's possible that my functions don't properly set the values of the 'evens', 'odds', and 'sign'. This scheme confuses me. I would like to expunge the functions c$pos and friends along with 'evens', 'odds', and 'sign'.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1692651&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070503 23:37:46

Bugs item #1712436, was opened at 20070503 19:37 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1712436&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core  Polynomials Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: rat/algebraic doesn't do full gcd Initial Comment: q: rat((%i1)/(%i+1))$ rat(q),algebraic => 2*%i/2 ??? but rat((%i1)/(%i+1)),algebraic => %i The 2's in the numerator and denominator should have cancelled. What's more puzzling: block([algebraic:true],rat(q)) => (%i1)/(%i+1) Also algebraic:true$ rat(q) => (%i1)/(%i+1) ?? ev(rat(q)) => 2*%i/2 ?? but algebraic:true$ rat((%i1)/(%i+1)) => %i This bug shows up both in 5.11.0/gcl and 5.11.0cvs/clisp  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1712436&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070501 19:36:47

Bugs item #1710774, was opened at 20070501 14:36 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1710774&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Installation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Troy Henderson (tlhiv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Windows + space in install directory Initial Comment: The default installation directory for Maxima in Windows is C:\Program Files\Maxima... which contains a space " " in the filename. Maxima will not run from the command line or from wxMaxima. Installing in, say, C:\maxima seems to work just fine.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1710774&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070501 18:57:38

Bugs item #1708293, was opened at 20070426 14:13 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1708293&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. >Category: Lisp Core  Solving equations Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Wrong solution of system Initial Comment: I was trying to calculate the equation of a hyperbola of the type x^2/a^2  y^2/b^2 = 1, given two points. Maxima finds, among others, also a wrong solution [a=0,b=0]. (%i4) hyp:x^2/a^2y^2/b^2=1$ (%i4) eq1:hyp,x=5/2,y=3/4$ (%i4) eq2:hyp,x=10/3,y=4/3$ (%i4) solve([eq1,eq2],[a,b]); (%o4) [[a=2,b=1],[a=2,b=1],[a=2,b=1],[a=2,b=1],[a=0,b=0]] F. Buratti (Italy) bufranz@... Maxima version: 5.11.99rc2 Maxima build date: 20:46 4/19/2007 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.8  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20070501 14:57 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Originator: NO Yes, this is a bug. Here is a simpler example: solve([1/a1/b=1,a=b],[a,b]) => [[a=0,b=0]]  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1708293&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070501 18:49:55

Bugs item #1710604, was opened at 20070501 08:49 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1710604&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: simple_equal Initial Comment: simple_equal has a line of bogus and unreachable code (defined in mload of all places) (defun $simple_equal (f g) "checks if equal up to simp flags" (cond ((quotesimpleequal f g)) ((quotesimpleequal g f)) ((and (numberp f) (numberp g) (or (eql f g)) (< ( f g) 1.0e4))) < never happens Also, simple_equal isn't documented. It's likely that simple_equal isn't needed, but it's nice that it (apparently) tests for equality without converting CRE expressions to general form.  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20070501 14:49 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Originator: NO The whole piece of code is weird. The (or...) clause was presumably intended to be (or (eql f g) (< ( f g) 1.0e4)), but that would be pretty ridiculous code, since it would make 0.0 == 1.0 but 1.0 /== 0.0. Fixing that with (abs ( f g)) would make 1.0e5 == 1.0e100. The rat case relies on the varlists being the same; is that desired? simple_equal(rat(x,x,y),rat(x,y,x)) => false. The quote case is completely weird; not clear what it is trying to do: simple_equal( '('(y+1)), '('(x+2)) ) => true (!!!!) simple_equal( '('(y+1)), '('(2)) ) => Lisp error Simple_equal seems to be used by run_testsuite to see if actuals match expected. It makes me a bit nervous in that role, but it makes me even more nervous to see it exposed to users as a $function. Let's rename it to simpleequal....  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1710604&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070501 12:49:22

Bugs item #1710604, was opened at 20070501 07:49 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1710604&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: simple_equal Initial Comment: simple_equal has a line of bogus and unreachable code (defined in mload of all places) (defun $simple_equal (f g) "checks if equal up to simp flags" (cond ((quotesimpleequal f g)) ((quotesimpleequal g f)) ((and (numberp f) (numberp g) (or (eql f g)) (< ( f g) 1.0e4))) < never happens Also, simple_equal isn't documented. It's likely that simple_equal isn't needed, but it's nice that it (apparently) tests for equality without converting CRE expressions to general form.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1710604&group_id=4933 