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}
(63) 
_{Sep}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 







1

2

3

4
(4) 
5

6
(2) 
7
(2) 
8
(3) 
9
(1) 
10

11

12

13
(2) 
14

15
(1) 
16
(7) 
17
(1) 
18
(1) 
19

20

21

22

23

24
(1) 
25
(2) 
26
(5) 
27
(1) 
28
(1) 
29
(4) 
30
(6) 






From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081130 22:04:37

Bugs item #2359851, was opened at 20081129 16:10 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359851&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  Complex Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: unsimplified result for carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) Initial Comment: carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) returns atan(sqrt(3)/3), which is unsimplified; expand(%) correctly gives %pi/6. The argument sqrt(3)/3 should have been simplified to 3^(1/2) == 1/sqrt(3).  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20081130 13:31 Message: Sorry, I forgot to mention the Maxima version: 5.15.0 GCL Windows.  Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081130 13:10 Message: What version are you using? Works for me in curent cvs  I think this was fixed in trigi.lisp rev 1.30.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359851&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081130 22:03:05

Bugs item #1504146, was opened at 20060610 17:59 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1504146&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  Assume Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) >Assigned to: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Summary: taylor asks pn? when expr is zero Initial Comment: taylor( asin( ( cos(x+a)^2 + sin(x)^21 ) / a), a, 0, 2) asks whether sin(x)^2+cos(x)^21 is positive or negative, where of course it is identically zero.  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081130 17:03 Message: as of comm2.lisp rev 1.22, simpatan2 no longer asks questions: (%i8) taylor( asin( ( cos(x+a)^2 + sin(x)^21 ) / a), a, 0, 2); (%o8) %i*log(a)+(log(abs(2*sin(x)^2+2*cos(x)^22))*%i +atan2(2*sin(x)^2+2*cos(x)^22,0)) +2*%i*cos(x)*sin(x)*a/(sin(x)^2+cos(x)^21) (4*%i*sin(x)^4+(8*%i*cos(x)^24*%i)*sin(x)^24*%i*cos(x)^4 +4*%i*cos(x)^2%i) *a^2 /(4*sin(x)^4+(8*cos(x)^28)*sin(x)^2+4*cos(x)^48*cos(x)^2+4) (%i9) trigsimp(%); atan2(0,0) has been generated. (oops)  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20061118 14:52 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Originator: YES > Also, the graph (2d!) of sin(x)^2+cos(x)^2 is not a straight line! This is because of rounding errors. To see clearly how small these errors are, try plot2d(sin(x)^2+cos(x)^21,[x,0,6]); This gives you a useful scale for the y axis. Unfortunately, plot2d(sin(x)^2+cos(x)^2,...) does not  it shows the min and max values as 1, where it is in fact 0.999999999999999 > 1.000000000000001 or something.  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20061118 11:16 Message: Logged In: NO Also, the graph (2d!) of sin(x)^2+cos(x)^2 is not a straight line! S.Sangwal sangwal77 AT yahoo.com  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20060611 14:47 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 It would be OK if taylor/asksign asked if the expression was pnz, because the user could answer z (there will always be some cases that asksign can't handle, after all). The problem is that taylor/asksign is asking if it is pn, not giving the user the possibility of answering z.  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20060611 14:30 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 I don't think the bug is in taylor; reassigning the category to "Lisp Core  Assume". Feel free to change the category again. asksign (sin(x)^2+cos(x)^21); => Is sin(x)^2+cos(x)^21 pnz ? is(equal(sin(x)^2+cos(x)^21,0)); => Maxima was unable to evaluate the predicate I don't know how hard asksign and/or is and/or mevalp should try to simplify. trigsimp(sin(x)^2+cos(x)^21); => 0 but trigsimp isn't applied automatically.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1504146&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081130 22:02:34

Bugs item #1467368, was opened at 20060409 17:45 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1467368&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  Simplification Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: logcontract returns unsimplified expr Initial Comment: expr: log(%e*k)log(%e^1*k)$ logcontract(expr) => log(%e^2) which is unsimplified: expand(logcontract(expr)) => 2 Maxima version: 5.9.3 Maxima build date: 0:52 3/20/2006 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081130 16:51 Message: fixed in comm2.lisp rev 1.22 and simp.lisp rev 1.64: (%i6) logcontract(log(%e*k)log(%e^1*k)); (%o6) 2 (%i7) log(%e^2),logexpand:false; (%o7) 2  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20060823 22:04 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Observed in 5.9.3.99rc2.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1467368&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081130 21:56:56

Bugs item #2298141, was opened at 20081116 06:58 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2298141&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: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 4 Private: No Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisbl) >Assigned to: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Summary: atan2 & asksign Initial Comment: When %piargs is true, atan2 sometimes does an asksign. In atan2(x,x), if x is zero (maybe that's farfetched, I suppose), you're stuck: (%i1) atan2(x,x); Is x positive or negative? pos; (%o1) %pi/4 As a general rule, I think simplifying functions shouldn't do asksign. Setting %piargs to false, prevents atan2 from doing an asksign (undocumented). But %piargs : false causes bugs in limit and integrate.  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081130 16:56 Message: as of comm2.lisp rev 1.22, simpatan2 doesn't ask questions: (%i2) atan2(x,x); (%o2) atan2(x,x) (%i3) assume(x>0); (%o3) [x > 0] (%i4) atan2(x,x); (%o4) %pi/4 (%i5) atan2(x,x); (%o5) 3*%pi/4  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2298141&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081130 18:32:08

Bugs item #2359851, was opened at 20081129 16:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359851&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  Complex Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: unsimplified result for carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) Initial Comment: carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) returns atan(sqrt(3)/3), which is unsimplified; expand(%) correctly gives %pi/6. The argument sqrt(3)/3 should have been simplified to 3^(1/2) == 1/sqrt(3).  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20081130 13:31 Message: Sorry, I forgot to mention the Maxima version: 5.15.0 GCL Windows.  Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081130 13:10 Message: What version are you using? Works for me in curent cvs  I think this was fixed in trigi.lisp rev 1.30.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359851&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081130 18:10:36

Bugs item #2359851, was opened at 20081129 16:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359851&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  Complex Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: unsimplified result for carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) Initial Comment: carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) returns atan(sqrt(3)/3), which is unsimplified; expand(%) correctly gives %pi/6. The argument sqrt(3)/3 should have been simplified to 3^(1/2) == 1/sqrt(3).  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081130 13:10 Message: What version are you using? Works for me in curent cvs  I think this was fixed in trigi.lisp rev 1.30.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359851&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081129 21:10:04

Bugs item #2359851, was opened at 20081129 16:10 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=2359851&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  Complex Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: unsimplified result for carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) Initial Comment: carg((sqrt(3)*%i+3)/2) returns atan(sqrt(3)/3), which is unsimplified; expand(%) correctly gives %pi/6. The argument sqrt(3)/3 should have been simplified to 3^(1/2) == 1/sqrt(3).  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359851&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081129 20:40:06

Bugs item #2359657, was opened at 20081129 20:42 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359657&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  Simplification Group: None >Status: Deleted Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Wrong simplification of (1)^(1/3) Initial Comment: The following expression is wrongly simplified: (%i54) (1)^(1/3); (%o54) 1 We also get the wrong result with a rectform: (%i59) rectform((1)^(1/3)); (%o59) 1 A correct result can be expressed as: %e^(1/3*%i*%pi) The numerical result would be: 0.5 + %i * 0.86602 We can force Maxima to give a correct numerical result: (%i60) (1)^(1/3),numer; (%o60) 1.0*(1)^0.33333333333333 To get the numerical result we have first to do a rectform: (%i61) rectform(%); (%o61) 1.0*%i*sin(0.33333333333333*%pi)+1.0*cos(0.33333333333333*%pi) (%i62) %,numer; (%o62) 0.50.86602540378444*%i We get a correct numerical result for a bigfloat number too, e.g. (1.0b0)^(1/3) but not for a double float. This is reported in the bug report SF[619927]. Maxima does the wrong simplification for all rational exponents which have an odd integer in the denominator e.g 1/5, 2/5, 3/5, ... 1/7, 2/7, 3/7, ... For an even integer in the denominator an unsimplified result is returned. I think this is a serious error and I am wondering if we have further bugs related to this wrong simplification. Dieter Kaiser  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20081129 21:40 Message: Deleting the report because it is not a bug.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359657&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081129 19:42:31

Bugs item #2359657, was opened at 20081129 19:42 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=2359657&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  Simplification Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Wrong simplification of (1)^(1/3) Initial Comment: The following expression is wrongly simplified: (%i54) (1)^(1/3); (%o54) 1 We also get the wrong result with a rectform: (%i59) rectform((1)^(1/3)); (%o59) 1 A correct result can be expressed as: %e^(1/3*%i*%pi) The numerical result would be: 0.5 + %i * 0.86602 We can force Maxima to give a correct numerical result: (%i60) (1)^(1/3),numer; (%o60) 1.0*(1)^0.33333333333333 To get the numerical result we have first to do a rectform: (%i61) rectform(%); (%o61) 1.0*%i*sin(0.33333333333333*%pi)+1.0*cos(0.33333333333333*%pi) (%i62) %,numer; (%o62) 0.50.86602540378444*%i We get a correct numerical result for a bigfloat number too, e.g. (1.0b0)^(1/3) but not for a double float. This is reported in the bug report SF[619927]. Maxima does the wrong simplification for all rational exponents which have an odd integer in the denominator e.g 1/5, 2/5, 3/5, ... 1/7, 2/7, 3/7, ... For an even integer in the denominator an unsimplified result is returned. I think this is a serious error and I am wondering if we have further bugs related to this wrong simplification. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2359657&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081129 12:10:27

Bugs item #2358696, was opened at 20081129 05:55 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=2358696&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: Barton Willis (willisbl) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: is equal bug Initial Comment: (%i6) e : sqrt(1x^2); (%o6) sqrt(1x^2) (%i7) ec : conjugate(e); (%o7) conjugate(sqrt(1x^2)) Wrong: (%i8) is(equal(e,ec)); (%o8) true The user documentation for equal says that equal will examine ratsimp(eec); but (%i5) ratsimp(eec); (%o5) sqrt(1x^2)conjugate(sqrt(1x^2))  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2358696&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081128 02:59:29

Bugs item #1977992, was opened at 20080529 15:45 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1977992&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  Limit Group: None Status: Closed Resolution: Duplicate Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: no limit calculation Initial Comment: /*wxMaxima 0.7.1 http://wxmaxima.sourceforge.netMaxima 5.12.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.netUsing Lisp GNU Common Lisp (GCL) GCL 2.6.7 (aka GCL)Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.This is a development version of Maxima. The function bug_report()provides bug reporting information. Maxima version: 5.12.0Maxima build date: 15:52 7/20/2007host type: i686pclinuxgnulispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL)lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7 (%i1) abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)); (%o1) abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)) (%i2) limit(%o1, x, 0); (%o2) lim(abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)),x,0) amedeo.maddalena@...  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20081128 02:59 Message: 9Wt3Km <a href="http://laiqwchxzldk.com/">laiqwchxzldk</a>;, [url=http://ypczmhtdkacp.com/]ypczmhtdkacp[/url], [link=http://kdotcizyavox.com/]kdotcizyavox[/link], http://ixsyegovkzsd.com/  Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081116 16:21 Message: duplicate of 1978090.  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20080730 18:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 Originator: NO See also bug 104933 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1978090&group_id=4933&atid=104933  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1977992&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081127 22:04:03

Bugs item #2354306, was opened at 20081127 23:04 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=2354306&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: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Andrej Vodopivec (andrejv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Questions with multiple commands Initial Comment: Maxima prints main prompt after questions if multiple commands are entered: (%i5) 1$ ode2('diff(Y,x,2) + a*Y, Y, x); Is a positive, negative, or zero? (%i6) nonzero; Is a positive, negative, or zero? (%i6) pos; (%o6) Y = %k1 sin(sqrt(a) x) + %k2 cos(sqrt(a) x) (%i7) build_info(); Maxima version: 5.16post Maxima build date: 13:0 11/25/2008 host type: i386appledarwin9.5.0 lispimplementationtype: CMU Common Lisp lispimplementationversion: Stage 3 20071107T024924 (19D)  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2354306&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081126 22:32:02

Bugs item #1054472, was opened at 20041026 05:35 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1054472&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: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: defint(log(1+exp(A+B*cos(phi))),phi,0,%pi) wrong Initial Comment: Maxima 5.9.0 C1) assume(B>0,BA>0)$ (C2) integrate(log(1+exp(A+B*cos(phi))),phi,0,%pi);  B B A (D2) 3 %PI LOG(%E (%E + %E )) But if we give A and B numerical values (C3) B:3$ A:2$ ev(D2,numer); (C4) (C5) (D5) 2.952421848475173 (C6) B:3.2$ A:3$ ev(D2,numer); (C7) (C8) (D8) .0191075509605848 while by evaluating the integral numerically we obtain something different (C11) B:3$ A:2$ romberg(log(1+exp(A+B*cos(phi))),phi,0,%pi); (C12) (C13) (D13) 7.506856487627962 (C14) B:3.2$ A:3$ romberg(log(1+exp(A+B*cos(phi))),phi,0,%pi); (C15) (C16) (D16) 0.663669430006855 The integrand does not look like the kind of thing that would give the romberg procedure any trouble (C25) plot2d(log(1+exp(A+B*cos(phi))),[phi,0,%pi])$ In fact, by visual inspection of the plot it is clear that the area under the curve is much closer to 0.66 (romberg's result) than to 0.02 (as integrate would have us believe). The same problem occurs if we use defint instead of integrate. Cheers.  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081126 17:32 Message: fixed in risch.lisp rev 1.16  now returns unevaluated.  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20060731 01:00 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Observed in 5.9.3cvs. Not sure, but it looks like integrate yields a different result when A and B are symbols compared to when they are given specific values A=2, B=3.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1054472&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081126 22:30:37

Bugs item #929704, was opened at 20040405 08:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=929704&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: Fix for 5.9.0 >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: defint log(abs(...))/sqrt(...) gives wrong result Initial Comment: integrate((log(abs(diff(4*x*(1x),x))))/(%pi*sqrt(x*(1 x))),x,0,1); The resoult of computation is log(4); ,but it is not corect,the right resoult is log(2);  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081126 17:30 Message: fixed in risch.lisp rev 1.16  now returns unevaluated.  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20060902 09:17 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 If you trace antideriv, you can see that it is computing the indefinite integral and returns the result: 2*atan(sqrt(1x)/sqrt(x))*log(abs(8*x4)) The derivative doesn't look anything like the integrand. But maxima thinks the indefinite integral doesn't exist. The function antideriv is doing something but I don't know what.  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20060729 02:06 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Observed in 5.9.3cvs.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=929704&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081126 15:16:57

Bugs item #2180110, was opened at 20081019 12:11 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2180110&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: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: GCL do not signal an overflow converting bigfloat to float Initial Comment: With GCL we do not get overflow errors when converting bigfloat numbers into float numbers which are obviously too big to fit in a float number: This is a correct example: (%i11) float(gamma(150b0)); (%o11) 3.8089226376305632E+260 The following bigfloat numbers are too big. The result is unpredicable and wrong: (%i12) float(gamma(250b0)); (%o12) 4.0014303970800103E127 (%i13) float(gamma(2500b0)); (%o13) 5.0208574388889818E+9 I have observed this for GCL 2.6.8. CLISP 2.44 gives an overflow error. The problem is the Lisp function scalefloat which is called by fp2flo in the file float.lisp. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20081126 10:16 Message: Here is a replacement. It explicitly checks for overflow and signals it. An overflow happens if the exponent is larger than 1024, the largest doublefloat exponent. (defmfun fp2flo (l) (let ((precision (caddar l)) (mantissa (cadr l)) (exponent (caddr l)) (fpprec machinemantissaprecision) (*m 0)) (setq mantissa (quotient (fpround mantissa) (expt 2.0 machinemantissaprecision))) (let ((e (+ exponent ( precision) *m machinemantissaprecision))) (if (>= (abs e) 1025) (merror "Floating point overflow in converting ~:M to flonum" l) (scalefloat mantissa e)))))  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2180110&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081126 14:19:25

Bugs item #2349973, was opened at 20081126 04:51 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2349973&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  Simplification Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: radcan gives incorrect result. Initial Comment:  Maxima version: 5.16.3 Maxima build date: 23:54 11/19/2008 host type: x86_64pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: SBCL lispimplementationversion: 1.0.19gentoo  The expression before radcan is not eqvivalent to the expression after. Steps to reproduce: (I'm trying to plot the amplitude characteristic of a signal sin(500pi*t) 0<t<1/5 , 0 otherwise, by using the absolute value of the laplace transform on the im axis). (%i54) s1: integrate(sin(400*%pi*t)*exp(s*t), t, 0, 1/5); (%o54) (400*%pi)/(s^2+160000*%pi^2)(400*%pi*%e^(s/5))/(s^2+160000*%pi^2) (%i55) plot2d([radcan(trigreduce(ratsimp(abs(ev(s1,s=%i*w)))))], [w,2000,2000], [plot_format, gnuplot])$ Warning: empty y range [0:0], adjusting to [1:1] (%i56) plot2d([trigreduce(ratsimp(abs(ev(s1,s=%i*w))))], [w,2000,2000], [plot_format, gnuplot])$ contact at: lereg at zero hyphen kelvin dot org  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20081126 09:19 Message: Read the documentation on radcan and radexpand. In particular, radcan will convert sqrt(x^22*x+1) to x  1, and sqrt(1x) to %i*sqrt(x1). This is what is happening to the second plot. It might be a bug that plot2d doesn't plot anything, though.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2349973&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081126 09:51:23

Bugs item #2349973, was opened at 20081126 09:51 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=2349973&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  Simplification Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: radcan gives incorrect result. Initial Comment:  Maxima version: 5.16.3 Maxima build date: 23:54 11/19/2008 host type: x86_64pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: SBCL lispimplementationversion: 1.0.19gentoo  The expression before radcan is not eqvivalent to the expression after. Steps to reproduce: (I'm trying to plot the amplitude characteristic of a signal sin(500pi*t) 0<t<1/5 , 0 otherwise, by using the absolute value of the laplace transform on the im axis). (%i54) s1: integrate(sin(400*%pi*t)*exp(s*t), t, 0, 1/5); (%o54) (400*%pi)/(s^2+160000*%pi^2)(400*%pi*%e^(s/5))/(s^2+160000*%pi^2) (%i55) plot2d([radcan(trigreduce(ratsimp(abs(ev(s1,s=%i*w)))))], [w,2000,2000], [plot_format, gnuplot])$ Warning: empty y range [0:0], adjusting to [1:1] (%i56) plot2d([trigreduce(ratsimp(abs(ev(s1,s=%i*w))))], [w,2000,2000], [plot_format, gnuplot])$ contact at: lereg at zero hyphen kelvin dot org  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2349973&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081125 15:52:42

Bugs item #2344049, was opened at 20081125 10:46 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2344049&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: Pending >Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Critical Bug Initial Comment: Below is the offending session. Needless to say the matrix QA should not be zero. ====================================== $ uname r 2.6.277generic $ maxima Maxima 5.13.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.net Using Lisp GNU Common Lisp (GCL) GCL 2.6.8 (aka GCL) Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING. Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter. This is a development version of Maxima. The function bug_report() provides bug reporting information. (%i1) Q: matrix([c, s, 0],[s,c,0],[0,0,1]); [ c  s 0 ] [ ] (%o1) [ s c 0 ] [ ] [ 0 0 1 ] (%i2) A: matrix([0,0,1],[0,0,0],[1,0,0]); [ 0 0 1 ] [ ] (%o2) [ 0 0 0 ] [ ] [ 1 0 0 ] (%i3) Q*A; [ 0 0 0 ] [ ] (%o3) [ 0 0 0 ] [ ] [ 0 0 0 ] (%i4) ======================================= How can anyone be expected to take Maxima seriously with bugs like this?  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20081125 10:52 Message: Q*A is an elementbyelement multiply. Perhaps you wanted Q . A, which is a matrix multiply? Marking as pending/invalid. If this analysis is wrong, please update this bug report.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2344049&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081125 15:46:37

Bugs item #2344049, was opened at 20081125 15:46 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=2344049&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: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Critical Bug Initial Comment: Below is the offending session. Needless to say the matrix QA should not be zero. ====================================== $ uname r 2.6.277generic $ maxima Maxima 5.13.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.net Using Lisp GNU Common Lisp (GCL) GCL 2.6.8 (aka GCL) Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING. Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter. This is a development version of Maxima. The function bug_report() provides bug reporting information. (%i1) Q: matrix([c, s, 0],[s,c,0],[0,0,1]); [ c  s 0 ] [ ] (%o1) [ s c 0 ] [ ] [ 0 0 1 ] (%i2) A: matrix([0,0,1],[0,0,0],[1,0,0]); [ 0 0 1 ] [ ] (%o2) [ 0 0 0 ] [ ] [ 1 0 0 ] (%i3) Q*A; [ 0 0 0 ] [ ] (%o3) [ 0 0 0 ] [ ] [ 0 0 0 ] (%i4) ======================================= How can anyone be expected to take Maxima seriously with bugs like this?  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2344049&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081124 17:05:28

Bugs item #2176843, was opened at 20081018 08:15 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by amundson You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2176843&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: Share Libraries Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: f90 does not use correct continuation character Initial Comment: Example usage: (%i1) load("f90"); (%i2) f90(long_expression); where long_expression is long enough to need more than one line of fortran, results in fixed format fortran output with the continuation character being 1,2,3,... instead of & as if should be for fortran90 or higher. The correct behaviour is described in the documentation, but is not exhibited by f90. I am using Maxima version 5.15.0, which is packaged with Fedora 9.  >Comment By: James Amundson (amundson) Date: 20081124 11:05 Message: Fixed in cvs. Thanks to whomever reported the bug initially and to hgeyer for identifying the exact problem.  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20081023 09:33 Message: An example workaround posted at: http://jstults.blogspot.com/2008/10/maximacodesfortran90forme.html Just write out the matrix elementwise.  Comment By: Harald Geyer (hgeyer) Date: 20081018 20:12 Message: The Problem seems to be that f90 calls back to the standard core fortran code, especially the function $fortmx in the case where it outputs a matrix. $fortmx calls fortranprint instead of f90print.  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20081018 10:09 Message: f90 only uses the incorrect continuation character when trying to output a matrix expression. (%i1) f90( long_matrix_expression ); Produces output with oldstyle continuation, but (%i2) f90( long_matrix_expression[1] ); Produces the correct type of output for the element of the matrix requested.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2176843&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081118 13:04:01

Bugs item #2210087, was opened at 20081030 13:23 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2210087&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: Includes proposed fix >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) >Assigned to: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Summary: integrate((x+1)^2.0,x) loops endlessly Initial Comment: Maxima can integrate expressions like (x+1)^n where n is an integer or a floating point representation of an integer, e.g. integrate((x+1)^8.0,x). But this does not work for the floating point numbers 2.0, 3.0, ..., 5.0 as an exponent. Maxima loops endlessly. The reason is the following code in DIFFDIV (the bug is marked): (cond ((and (mexptp exp) (mplusp (cadr exp)) (integerp2 (caddr exp)) ; here the bug (< (caddr exp) 6) (> (caddr exp) 0)) (return (integrator (expandexpt (cadr exp) (caddr exp)) var)))) The function INTEGERP2 checks for an integer or an floating point representation of an integer. If the value is between 0 and 6 the expression is expanded with the function EXPANDEXPT and the integrator is called again. But this does not work with a floating point representation of an integer, because for this case the expression is not expanded by the function EXPANDEXPT. The integrator gets again the same expression and loops endlessly. To possible corrections: 1. Convert the floating point exponent to an integer and then call EXPANDEXPT. 2. Do not test for a floating point respresentation and change INTEGERP2 to INTEGERP. Now for a floating point exponent betweeen 0.0 and 6.0 the result is given in the form (1/n)*(x+1)^(n+1) where 1/n and (n+1) are floating point numbers. I think solution 2 is better, because we get the results with the expected floating point numbers. Dieter Kaiser  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081118 08:03 Message: Applied solution 2 in sin.lisp rev 1.33.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2210087&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081117 18:44:30

Bugs item #2306402, was opened at 20081117 19:44 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=2306402&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  Simplification Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Volker van Nek (van_nek) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: scalarp bug Initial Comment: (%i1) declare(x,scalar)$ (%i2) scalarp(foo(x)); (%o2) true (%i3) scalarp(foo(1)); (%o3) false (%i4) scalarp(foo(x,1)); (%o4) true Only (%o3) is correct. The declared scalar seems to mislead the test. Volker van Nek  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2306402&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081116 17:38:26

Bugs item #2272679, was opened at 20081112 19:02 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2272679&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: Pending >Resolution: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Cesar Agustin GarciaVazquez (cesarnda) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error computing a sum Initial Comment: If I compute: (%i6) load(simplify_sum); (%o6) /opt/sage/local/share/maxima/5.16.3/share/contrib/solve_rec/simplify_sum.ma c (%i7) simplify_sum(sum(1/(x*(x+1)),x,1,inf)); (%o7) 1 it works perfectly fine, but it turns out that if I do: (%i8) simplify_sum(sum(1/x  1/(x+1),x,1,inf)); I get an error that the sum is divergent, even though 1/x  1/(x+1) = 1/(x*(x+1))  Comment By: Andrej Vodopivec (andrejv) Date: 20081113 03:48 Message: The error comes from (%i1) sm : sum(1/x  1/(x+1), x, 1, inf)$ (%i2) sm, simpsum; Sum is divergent  an error. To debug this try debugmode(true); The simplify_sum in cvs computes the sum correctly. (%i3) simplify_sum(sm); (%o3) 1 (%i4) build_info(); Maxima version: 5.16post Maxima build date: 10:20 11/12/2008 host type: i386appledarwin9.5.0 lispimplementationtype: CMU Common Lisp lispimplementationversion: Stage 3 20071107T024924 (19D) Andrej  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2272679&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081116 16:31:38

Bugs item #1978090, was opened at 20080529 13:07 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1978090&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  Limit Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) >Assigned to: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Summary: strange limit result Initial Comment: /*wxMaxima 0.7.5 http://wxmaxima.sourceforge.netMaxima 5.15.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.netUsing Lisp GNU Common Lisp (GCL) GCL 2.6.8 (aka GCL)Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.The function bug_report() provides bug reporting information. (%i1) abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)); (%o1) abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)) (%i2) limit(%o1, x, 0, minus); (%o2) sqrt(2) (%i3) limit(%o1, x, 0, plus); (%o3) sqrt(2) (%i4) bug_report()$The Maxima bug database is available at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=104933&group_id=4933&func=browseSubmit bug reports by following the 'Submit New' link on that page.Please include the following build information with your bug report:Maxima version: 5.15.0Maxima build date: 17:36 4/20/2008 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL)lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.8The above information is also available from the Maxima function build_info().(%i5) amedeo.maddalena@...  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081116 11:31 Message: Fixed using gruntz algorithm in limit.lisp rev 1.60.  Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20080701 10:02 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1797506 Originator: NO In current cvs: (%i2) limit(sin(x)/sqrt(1cos(x)), x, 0, plus); (%o2) sqrt(2) OK (%i3) limit(sin(x)/sqrt(1cos(x)), x, 0, minus); (%o3) sqrt(2) Should be sqrt(2). In both cases, limit is using taylor: (%i4) taylor(sin(x)/sqrt(1cos(x)), x, 0, 3); (%o4) sqrt(2)sqrt(2)*x^2/8 This fits one side of the discontinuity. What is the correct behavior for taylor in this situation?  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1978090&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20081116 16:21:06

Bugs item #1977992, was opened at 20080529 11:45 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1977992&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  Limit Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Duplicate Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: no limit calculation Initial Comment: /*wxMaxima 0.7.1 http://wxmaxima.sourceforge.netMaxima 5.12.0 http://maxima.sourceforge.netUsing Lisp GNU Common Lisp (GCL) GCL 2.6.7 (aka GCL)Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter.This is a development version of Maxima. The function bug_report()provides bug reporting information. Maxima version: 5.12.0Maxima build date: 15:52 7/20/2007host type: i686pclinuxgnulispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL)lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7 (%i1) abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)); (%o1) abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)) (%i2) limit(%o1, x, 0); (%o2) lim(abs(sin(x))/sqrt(1cos(x)),x,0) amedeo.maddalena@...  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20081116 11:21 Message: duplicate of 1978090.  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20080730 14:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 Originator: NO See also bug 104933 http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1978090&group_id=4933&atid=104933  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1977992&group_id=4933 