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}
(30) 
_{May}
(97) 
_{Jun}
(81) 
_{Jul}
(63) 
_{Aug}
(64) 
_{Sep}
(28) 
_{Oct}
(45) 
_{Nov}
(48) 
_{Dec}
(109) 
2015 
_{Jan}
(105) 
_{Feb}

_{Mar}

_{Apr}

_{May}

_{Jun}

_{Jul}

_{Aug}

_{Sep}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 






1
(3) 
2
(9) 
3
(1) 
4
(7) 
5
(4) 
6
(2) 
7
(6) 
8
(2) 
9
(2) 
10
(4) 
11
(3) 
12

13
(11) 
14
(1) 
15
(4) 
16

17

18
(1) 
19
(5) 
20

21
(3) 
22
(2) 
23
(1) 
24

25
(1) 
26

27
(4) 
28
(1) 
29
(11) 
30
(2) 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070619 17:38:55

Bugs item #1290363, was opened at 20050913 14:39 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1290363&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  Integration Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Vadim V. Zhytnikov (vvzhy) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integrate((tan(x)^2+1)/tan(x),x,%pi/6,%pi/3)  error Initial Comment: (%i1) integrate((tan(x)^2+1)/tan(x),x,%pi/6,%pi/3); `sign' called on an imaginary argument: 1/4 ( 1)  an error. Quitting. To debug this try debugmode(true); Right result is log(3).  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20070619 13:38 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 Originator: NO This no longer produces an error. After asking if sin(x+%pi/6) is positive and if sin(x+%pi/3) is positive (I answered "yes"), maxima says the answer is log(sqrt(3)/2)+log(4)/2+log(2)+log(3/4)/2 logcontract converts this to log(9)/2, which is log(3). Closing this bug. Should another bug be opened because maxima asks these questions? The questions come from limit, via sincosintsubs.  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20060216 09:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 This integral is converted to integrate((1+tan(x+%pi/6)^2)/tan(x+%pi/6),x,0,%pi/6) Eventually, rischint is called and the error comes from somewhere in rischint.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1290363&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070619 17:30:23

Bugs item #1468951, was opened at 20060411 21:28 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1468951&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  Integration Group: None >Status: Pending Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error in "integrate" output (ver. 5.9.3) Initial Comment: Attempting to evaluate integral of a product of bessel and trigonometric function. Obtained following output (error is given in %o5): %i1) display2d:false; (%o1) false (%i2) w:bessel_j(0,2.4048*(r/R0))*cos(%pi*(z/H)); (%o2) bessel_j(0,2.4048*r/R0)*cos(%pi*z/H) (%i3) phi1:c1*w; (%o3) bessel_j(0,2.4048*r/R0)*c1*cos(%pi*z/H) (%i4) eq1:(1/r)*diff(r*diff(phi1,r,1))+diff(phi1,z,2)+Bsq*phi1=0; (%o4) ((5.78306304*c1*r^2*cos(%pi*z/H) *(bessel_j(0,2.4048*r/R0) .4158349966733201*bessel_j(1,2.4048*r/R0)*R0/r) /R0^3 +2.4048*bessel_j(1,2.4048*r/R0)*c1*r*cos(%pi*z/H)/R0^2) *del(R0) 2.4048*%pi*bessel_j(1,2.4048*r/R0)*c1*r*z*sin(%pi*z/H)*del(H)/(H^2*R0) +2.4048*%pi*bessel_j(1,2.4048*r/R0)*c1*r*sin(%pi*z/H)*del(z)/(H*R0) +(5.78306304*c1*r*cos(%pi*z/H) *(bessel_j(0,2.4048*r/R0) .4158349966733201*bessel_j(1,2.4048*r/R0)*R0/r) /R0^2 2.4048*bessel_j(1,2.4048*r/R0)*c1*cos(%pi*z/H)/R0) *del(r)2.4048*bessel_j(1,2.4048*r/R0)*r*cos(%pi*z/H)*del(c1)/R0) /r %pi^2*bessel_j(0,2.4048*r/R0)*c1*cos(%pi*z/H)/H^2 +bessel_j(0,2.4048*r/R0)*Bsq*c1*cos(%pi*z/H) = 0 (%i5) int1:integrate(integrate(eq1*w*r,r,0,R0),z,0,H); `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 5.78306304 by 16048//2775 = 5.783063063063064 `rat' replaced .4158349966733201 by 625//1503 = 0.41583499667332 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 5.78306304 by 16048//2775 = 5.783063063063064 `rat' replaced .4158349966733201 by 625//1503 = 0.41583499667332 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 5.78306304 by 16048//2775 = 5.78306306306306 `rat' replaced 0.41583499667332 by 625//1503 = 0.41583499667332 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 5.78306304 by 16048//2775 = 5.783063063063064 `rat' replaced 0.41583499667332 by 625//1503 = 0.41583499667332 Is R0 positive, negative, or zero? pos; `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 5.78306304 by 16048//2775 = 5.78306306306306 `rat' replaced 0.41583499667332 by 625//1503 = 0.41583499667332 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 5.78306304 by 16048//2775 = 5.783063063063064 `rat' replaced 0.41583499667332 by 625//1503 = 0.41583499667332 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 `rat' replaced 2.4048 by 1503//625 = 2.4048 (%o5) H*false = 0 (%i6) email address: ebayaccount@...  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20070619 13:30 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 Originator: NO I don't think this is an integration problem but really an ODE problem, as Robert mentions. Marking this as pending so it will be autoclosed in a couple of weeks.  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20060411 22:10 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 After trying this example a bit, I believe eq1 wants to be solved with the function ode2 instead of integrate (because integrate doesn't understand about stuff like dy/dx appearing in integrands, and it doesn't like <expr> = 0, it just wants <expr>). Also to get the appropriate symbolic differentials like dfoo/dr you *might* need to put depends (foo, r); before the equation (to enable diff (foo, r); to come out as dfoo/dr). A couple of ideas to help focus debugging in general. (1) Replace the floats with equivalent rationals, or better still replace them with 1's. (2) Try to find a simpler version of the example. Try posting a message to the mailing list (http://maxima.sf.net/maximalist.html), preferably after simplifying the example. Some people know a lot more about Maxima's capabilities for diff eq's.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1468951&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070619 17:28:11

Bugs item #657382, was opened at 20021221 20:20 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=657382&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  Integration Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 4 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: defint/limit infinite loop Initial Comment: integrate(1/(x^51),x,1,inf) appears to get into an infinite loop inside $limit (over 4 hours CPU).  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20070619 13:27 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 Originator: NO If ININTERVAL in defint.lisp is slightly modified to use ASKGREAT instead of ASKGREATEQ, where ASKGREAT checks if x > y instead of x >= y, then maxima quickly says the integral is divergent. I think this is correct since 1/(x^51) has a partial fraction expansion of 1/5/(x1) + <stuff>. Do not know if this change is the correct change or not.  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20070613 14:31 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 Originator: NO FWIW, this still happens in 5.12 cvs. What's happening is that maxima has computed the antiderivative correctly and is now trying to carefully substitute in the limits of integration to make sure everything is on the right sheet. This is basically done in takeprincipal and intsubs. I don't understand why maxima does the limit essentially twice like limit(anti,x,1+eps,plus)  limit(anti,x,1eps,minus). This seems to be where maxima is getting stuck. If it were to finish, maxima would then go and take the limit as eps goes to zero from above. Perhaps if the pole is at one of the limits of integration as it is here, maxima should do something else? I think the current code assumes the pole is within the integration interval.  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20021221 20:21 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Sorry,. I forgot to mention that this is under 5.5 GCL/Windows 2000.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=657382&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070619 13:34:14

Bugs item #1732315, was opened at 20070606 13:24 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by robert_dodier You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1732315&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  Trigonometry Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: David Ronis (ronis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: trigrat dies on a matrix Initial Comment: I want to apply trigrat to the elements of a matrix, for example: p1:matrix([1,0],[0,1]); p2:matrix([0,1],[1,0]); p3:matrix([0,1],[1,0]); S:s1*p1+s2*p2+s3*p3; M:(ident(2)coth(del*t/2)/del*S); trigrat(%); However, when I try to run this I get: (%i6) trigrat(%); Maxima encountered a Lisp error: CAR: 1 is not a list Automatically continuing. To reenable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. (I'm using a fairly recent CVS version and clisp) This may be related to bug 156234 David  >Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20070619 07:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: NO Patch below (or something close to it) was committed as r1.8 share/trigonometric/trigrat.lisp. Closing this report as fixed.  Comment By: David Ronis (ronis) Date: 20070607 09:31 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=609364 Originator: YES Hi Robert, Although I had trouble applying the patch (I did it manually in the end). It seems to have done the trick. Thanks  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20070606 19:49 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: NO Here's a patch which, I hope, resolves this problem and 1562340. I'll apply this in a day or two unless I hear otherwise. I wonder if there is a better way to know when to map over the expression (better than just enumerating the operators for which it is preferred).  share/trigonometry/trigrat.lisp 20070502 23:33:35.000000000 0600 +++ /tmp/trigrat.lisp 20070606 19:45:25.000000000 0600 @@ 22,7 +22,14 @@ (setq $lg (cons var $lg)) (rplaca lvar var))))) #$trigrat(exp):= block([e,n,d,lg,f,lexp,ls,d2,l2,alg,gcd1], +#$trigrat_equationp (e) := + not atom (e) + and member (op (e), ["=", "#", "<", "<=", ">=", ">"])$ + +#$trigrat(exp):= + if matrixp (exp) or listp (exp) or setp (exp) or trigrat_equationp (exp) + then map (trigrat, exp) + else block([e,n,d,lg,f,lexp,ls,d2,l2,alg,gcd1], declare(d2,special,lg,special,lexp,special), alg:algebraic,gcd1:gcd, algebraic:true,gcd:subres,  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20070606 19:19 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: NO This appears to be the same bug as 1562340. The problem could be resolved by having trigrat automatically distribute over matrix (and list, and =, and set, and anything else we can think of; it would be nice to have some way to indicate "foo distributes over bar" with a property, although it is OK by me to fix this bug by just pasting the necessary logic into trigrat).  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1732315&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20070619 13:31:15

Bugs item #1738169, was opened at 20070615 17:40 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by robert_dodier You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1738169&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: Documentation Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Harald Geyer (hgeyer) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: %piargs is not documented Initial Comment: There is a flag %piargs which defaults to true. It is mentioned in the testsuite, but it is not mentioned in the documentation.  >Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20070619 07:31 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: NO I wrote some documentation (in doc/info/Trigonometric.texi) for %piargs and %iargs. Closing this report as fixed.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1738169&group_id=4933 