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}
(97) 
_{Feb}

_{Mar}

_{Apr}

_{May}

_{Jun}

_{Jul}

_{Aug}

_{Sep}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 



1
(6) 
2
(14) 
3
(1) 
4
(1) 
5

6

7
(13) 
8
(6) 
9
(2) 
10
(8) 
11
(4) 
12

13
(15) 
14
(19) 
15
(3) 
16
(4) 
17
(2) 
18
(1) 
19
(1) 
20

21
(4) 
22
(7) 
23
(3) 
24

25
(2) 
26
(1) 
27
(1) 
28
(4) 
29
(7) 
30
(3) 
31
(1) 


From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091231 02:20:21

Bugs item #2535254, was opened at 20090125 11:34 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2535254&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: Closed Resolution: Out of Date Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Erich Neuwirth (neuwirthe) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: OSX build problem with 5.17.1 Initial Comment: I am tryiing to builld 5.17.1 on OSX 10.5.6. I can get the command lin version to work with CMUCL. With 'sudo make install' I get Making install in info pattern=`printf "\r$"` ; \ bad_files=`find . name '*.texi' print  xargs grep E l e "$pattern"` ; \ [ z "$bad_files" ]  ( echo "WARNING: The following files have DOSstyle EOLs: $bad_files" ; \ echo "Run /doc/info/fix_crlf to fix the problem." ) pattern=`printf "\t"` ; \ bad_files=`find . name '*.texi' print  xargs grep E l e "$pattern"` ; \ [ z "$bad_files" ]  ( echo "WARNING: The following files have unexpanded Tabs: $bad_files" ; \ echo "Run /doc/info/fix_tab to fix the problem." ) make[4]: Nothing to be done for `installexecam'. sh extract_categories.sh maxima sh: extract_categories.sh: No such file or directory make[4]: *** [maxima.html] Error 127 make[3]: *** [installam] Error 2 make[2]: *** [installrecursive] Error 1 make[1]: *** [installrecursive] Error 1 make: *** [installrecursive] Error 1 xmaxima can be started, but double clicking the commands to be run does not produce results.  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20091231 02:20 Message: 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: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091216 01:22 Message: This bug report seems to be out of date. There is no response to the last posting. Now we have Maxima 5.20. Setting the status to pending and the resolution to "out of date". Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20090225 20:16 Message: > I did use the latest tarball. Attached is the output of the grep as you requested. The grep output is something different. I'm attempting to determine whether the info (texinfo output) and html files are present in the tarball. Can you please run the tar/grep command as it was shown. Here it is for reference. tar tvzf maxima5.17.1.tar.gz  grep 'maxima\.\(info\html\)$'  Comment By: Erich Neuwirth (neuwirthe) Date: 20090127 08:55 Message: More info: I managed to get wxMaxima to run now. Compling from the tarball produced a running version. Compiling from the cvs download seemed to compile, but wxMaxima told me Maxima process terminated. xmaxima still does not work. I see (%i1), but on enter and on ShftEnter nothing happens, and clicking on the editable expressens in the lower window does not do anything either. But I am happy with a running wxMaxima in any case.  Comment By: Erich Neuwirth (neuwirthe) Date: 20090127 08:34 Message: I did use the latest tarball. Attached is the output of the grep as you requested. The files were already untarred, so I just grepped in the untarred directory. I also checked out the current version from cvs, and I have the same problem. Maxima itself works, but in xmaxima clicking the links does no work. In wxMaxima (I managed to build it with the instructions by Stuart Schmitt on http://pangea.stanford.edu/~schmitt/maxima_clisp.html When I try to start maxima I get Maxima process terminated. File Added: grep.out  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20090127 05:21 Message: I'm guessing that you are attempting to build Maxima from a tar ball. If not, please say so. The Maxima tar ball is supposed to contain the generated documentation (.info and .html files). What does the following show: tar tvzf maxima5.17.1.tar.gz  grep 'maxima\.\(info\html\)$' The intent is to detect maxima.info and maxima.html at the end of a line. You might need to adjust the regular expression. If your tarball does not contain maxima.info or maxima.html files, from where did you get it? If you did not get it from Sourceforge, you might obtain the tarball from the Maxima download page and try again. If your tarball does contain the generated documentation, make should not be trying to build it. If make is trying to build existing files, come back and leave another comment and we'll go from there.  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20090125 20:14 Message: I didn't try 5.17.1, but the CVS version installs ok for me on OSX and CMUCL. I do get lots of notes about unknown previous node when building the documentation.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2535254&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091230 22:06:16

Bugs item #2923828, was opened at 20091230 22:06 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2923828&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  Plotting Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: add_zeroes(k) does not work in a loop Initial Comment: Belongs to draw.lisp. When i try to create a picture series (as suggested by Mario Rodríguez Riotorto) for k:1 thru 10 do draw2d(terminal = png, file_name = concat("ga",add_zeroes(k)), pic_width = 300, pic_height = 300, explicit(x^(0.1*k),x,0,1)); the string is like "ga00000$K.png" Workaround: use "add_zeroes(1*k))" instead Maxima version: 5.20.1 Maxima build date: 21:25 12/14/2009 Host type: i686pcmingw32 Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8 Best Regards  freshman Klemens  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2923828&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091230 10:40:34

Bugs item #2922933, was opened at 20091229 17:35 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rui_maciel You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922933&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: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Defining function from expression doesn't relate arguments Initial Comment: Let's say we have the following expression: a: (x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1)*z/8; and let's say we declare the following function: f(x,y,z) := a; If we pass arguments to that function, the function fails to replace the expression's variables with the value of the arguments passed to the function. For example: (%i387) f(0,0,0); (x  1) x (y  1) y (z  1) z (%o387)  8 Yet, if the expression's variables are substituted in the function declaration then everything works as expected: (%i388) f(b,c,d) := subst([x=b,y=c,z=d],a); (%o388) f(b, c, d) := subst([x = b, y = c, z = d], a) (%i389) f(0,0,0); (%o389) 0 That extra call to subst() should not be needed in order to successfully declare a function from an expression.  >Comment By: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Date: 20091230 10:40 Message: That's weird. It appears it works with the define() function but if the := operator is used directly then the function definition fails. For example: (%i1) (x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1)*z/8; (%o1) ((x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1))*z/8; (%i2) f(x,y,z) := %; (%o2) f(x, y, z) := % (%i3) f(0,0,0); (%o3) f(x, y, z) := % (%i4) define(f(x,y,z), %o1); (%o4) f(x, y, z) := ((x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1)*z)/8 (%i5) f(0,0,0); (%o5) 0 Is this a bug or is this behaviour expected?  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091230 05:56 Message: You can successfully declare a function from an expression: (%i1) (x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1)*z/8; (%o1) ((x1)*x*(y1)*y*(z1)*z)/8 (%i2) define(f(x,y,z),%); (%o2) f(x,y,z):=((x1)*x*(y1)*y*(z1)*z)/8 (%i3) f(0,0,0); (%o3) 0  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922933&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091230 05:56:33

Bugs item #2922933, was opened at 20091229 19:35 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by alex108 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922933&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: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Defining function from expression doesn't relate arguments Initial Comment: Let's say we have the following expression: a: (x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1)*z/8; and let's say we declare the following function: f(x,y,z) := a; If we pass arguments to that function, the function fails to replace the expression's variables with the value of the arguments passed to the function. For example: (%i387) f(0,0,0); (x  1) x (y  1) y (z  1) z (%o387)  8 Yet, if the expression's variables are substituted in the function declaration then everything works as expected: (%i388) f(b,c,d) := subst([x=b,y=c,z=d],a); (%o388) f(b, c, d) := subst([x = b, y = c, z = d], a) (%i389) f(0,0,0); (%o389) 0 That extra call to subst() should not be needed in order to successfully declare a function from an expression.  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091230 07:56 Message: You can successfully declare a function from an expression: (%i1) (x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1)*z/8; (%o1) ((x1)*x*(y1)*y*(z1)*z)/8 (%i2) define(f(x,y,z),%); (%o2) f(x,y,z):=((x1)*x*(y1)*y*(z1)*z)/8 (%i3) f(0,0,0); (%o3) 0  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922933&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091229 17:35:38

Bugs item #2922933, was opened at 20091229 17:35 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by rui_maciel You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922933&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: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Defining function from expression doesn't relate arguments Initial Comment: Let's say we have the following expression: a: (x  1)*x*(y  1)*y*(z  1)*z/8; and let's say we declare the following function: f(x,y,z) := a; If we pass arguments to that function, the function fails to replace the expression's variables with the value of the arguments passed to the function. For example: (%i387) f(0,0,0); (x  1) x (y  1) y (z  1) z (%o387)  8 Yet, if the expression's variables are substituted in the function declaration then everything works as expected: (%i388) f(b,c,d) := subst([x=b,y=c,z=d],a); (%o388) f(b, c, d) := subst([x = b, y = c, z = d], a) (%i389) f(0,0,0); (%o389) 0 That extra call to subst() should not be needed in order to successfully declare a function from an expression.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922933&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091229 13:09:25

Bugs item #2921390, was opened at 20091226 10:37 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921390&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: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: Yes Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Console Interrupt error in wxmaxima Ubuntu 9.10 Initial Comment: Hi, I've installed maxima and wxmaxima in ubuntu 9.10 If i run maxima from terminal it seems ok but if I run wxmaxima I do not understand the reason why I haven't the prompt (%i1) I ran bug_report(); and this is the answer: Maxima encountered a Lisp error: Console interrupt. Automatically continuing. To reenable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. (%i1) The Maxima bug database is available at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=104933&group_id=4933&func=browse Submit bug reports by following the 'Submit New' link on that page. Please include the following build information with your bug report:  Maxima version: 5.17.1 Maxima build date: 14:31 7/13/2009 host type: x86_64unknownlinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7  The above information is also available from the Maxima function build_info(). (%o1) Could you help me? Thanks in advance  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20091229 13:09 Message: In addition to Dieter's comments, you can also download and install a Maxima binary for Ubuntu from here: http://zeus.nyf.hu/~blahota/maxima  Mario  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091229 02:38 Message: Thank you for your interest in Maxima. I am developing Maxima on Ubuntu 9.10 and I have no problems at all with Maxima or wxMaxima. I use various Lisp (CLISP, SBCL, ..) to compile and run Maxima. Unfortunately, there are a lot of problems with the Debian and Ubuntu packages of Maxima. Today, I have installed Maxima from the Ubuntu package. This is the version which is supported by the package management: (%i3) build_info(); Maxima version: 5.17.1 Maxima build date: 14:9 7/13/2009 host type: i686pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7 What I can say is, that this package does not work. I get a lot of errors. Most of them are already reported on various mailing list. I think there are some workarounds to get it to work which are reported on a mailing list on Ubuntu. But all of these problems are not a problem of Maxima. It is a problem of the Debian and Ubuntu packages. It is a pitty, that the Ubuntu user only get a not working Maxima package which is out of date. The best what I can say is to get Maxima directly from sourceforge.net and to build it by yourself as long as we get a working Maxima package on Ubuntu too. Setting the status to pending and the resolution to "works for me". Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921390&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091229 12:52:09

Bugs item #2922516, was opened at 20091228 22:06 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by rui_maciel You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922516&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: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: maxima terminal: display limited to 80 columns Initial Comment: I have a widescreen monitor and I run maxima on a terminal emulator (yakuake) which spans the entire screen. Eventhough the terminal window is maximized, maxima's output appears to be limited to a width of 80 columns, which results in lengthy expressions being needlessly broken with a line break at the 80 character mark. It would be great if maxima made it possible for the users to take full advantage of their monitor's real estate by not imposing an artificial 80 column limit.  >Comment By: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Date: 20091229 12:52 Message: The linel variable appears to be a good workaround butt, as you stated, it would be great if maxima automatically handled it itself. Nonetheless, things are great as they are and long expressions are always a pain to follow, no matter how wide the terminal is. Thanks for the help, rtoy. Kudos!  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20091228 23:40 Message: Look up the documentation for linel. Set linel to something larger. (It would be great if maxima could figure out the terminal width itself, but it can't.) Marking bug as pending/fixed.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922516&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091229 02:38:38

Bugs item #2921390, was opened at 20091226 11:37 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921390&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: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: Yes Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Console Interrupt error in wxmaxima Ubuntu 9.10 Initial Comment: Hi, I've installed maxima and wxmaxima in ubuntu 9.10 If i run maxima from terminal it seems ok but if I run wxmaxima I do not understand the reason why I haven't the prompt (%i1) I ran bug_report(); and this is the answer: Maxima encountered a Lisp error: Console interrupt. Automatically continuing. To reenable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. (%i1) The Maxima bug database is available at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=104933&group_id=4933&func=browse Submit bug reports by following the 'Submit New' link on that page. Please include the following build information with your bug report:  Maxima version: 5.17.1 Maxima build date: 14:31 7/13/2009 host type: x86_64unknownlinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7  The above information is also available from the Maxima function build_info(). (%o1) Could you help me? Thanks in advance  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091229 03:38 Message: Thank you for your interest in Maxima. I am developing Maxima on Ubuntu 9.10 and I have no problems at all with Maxima or wxMaxima. I use various Lisp (CLISP, SBCL, ..) to compile and run Maxima. Unfortunately, there are a lot of problems with the Debian and Ubuntu packages of Maxima. Today, I have installed Maxima from the Ubuntu package. This is the version which is supported by the package management: (%i3) build_info(); Maxima version: 5.17.1 Maxima build date: 14:9 7/13/2009 host type: i686pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7 What I can say is, that this package does not work. I get a lot of errors. Most of them are already reported on various mailing list. I think there are some workarounds to get it to work which are reported on a mailing list on Ubuntu. But all of these problems are not a problem of Maxima. It is a problem of the Debian and Ubuntu packages. It is a pitty, that the Ubuntu user only get a not working Maxima package which is out of date. The best what I can say is to get Maxima directly from sourceforge.net and to build it by yourself as long as we get a working Maxima package on Ubuntu too. Setting the status to pending and the resolution to "works for me". Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921390&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091229 02:20:28

Bugs item #2910796, was opened at 20091208 16:32 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2910796&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: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Could not run Maxima! Initial Comment: Does anybody knows why Maxima (the latest version, as the previous ones) does not run on my DELL studio 1555, with Avira and Kaspersky 2009 antivirus, having desabled all the possible defences from firewalls to Windows defence? Do you know any solution of that problem? I am starting to consider the fact that it could be my laptop that has some conflicts with Maxima, or maybe other softwares but actually I'm not using any particular one.... Thanks, Edoardo  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20091229 02:20 Message: 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: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091214 20:35 Message: Hello Edoardo, what version of Maxima do you have installed? Is it a download from sourceforge.net? Can you start wxMaxima? Can you start a Maxima session from a command window? What happens? Setting the status of this bug report to pending. More information is necessary. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2910796&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091229 01:02:49

Bugs item #2919296, was opened at 20091222 12:51 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2919296&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: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: binomial sums Initial Comment: wanted to use this in my teaching but... load(simplify_sum); sum(binomial(n,x)*p^x*(1p)^(nx),x,0,n); simplify_sum(%) 0 sum(binomial(n,x)*0.3^x*(10.3)^(nx),x,0,n); simplify_sum(%); rat: replaced 0.3 by 3/10 = 0.3 rat: replaced 0.7 by 7/10 = 0.7 rat: replaced 0.7 by 7/10 = 0.7 1  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091229 02:02 Message: I think the problem of this bug report has been fixed in simplify_sum.mac revison 1.28. Setting the status to pending and resolution to fixed. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091222 22:56 Message: Do it like this: load(simplify_sum); sum(binomial(n,x)*p^x*q^(nx),x,0,n); simplify_sum(%) (p+q)^n  Comment By: Andrej Vodopivec (andrejv) Date: 20091222 15:57 Message: This is a bug in the implementation of the Gosper algorithm from the Zeilberger package. A workaround for simplify_sum is to set Gosper_in_Zeilberger to false.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2919296&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091229 00:37:08

Bugs item #2921946, was opened at 20091227 19:42 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921946&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: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Expansion of bessel_k(1/2,x) with radexpand:false Initial Comment: The correct result for the expansion of bessel_k(1/2,x) is sqrt(%pi/2)*exp(x)/sqrt(x) We get this result with Maxima too: (%i4) bessel_k(1/2,x),besselexpand:true; (%o4) sqrt(%pi)*%e^x/(sqrt(2)*sqrt(x)) All seems to be correct, but this is by accident, because Maxima does in general the wrong simplification sqrt(1/x) > 1/sqrt(x). We can see it, when we set the flag radexpand to false: (%i6) bessel_k(1/2,x),besselexpand:true,radexpand:false; (%o6) sqrt(%pi/(2*x))*%e^x Now we get a result with sqrt(1/x) and not 1/sqrt(x), because the simplification sqrt(1/x) > 1/sqrt(x) is switched off. If we evaluate the last expression for negative real numbers, we get a wrong sign. Dieter Kaiser  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091229 01:37 Message: Fixed in bessel.lisp revision 1.84. Closing this bug report as fixed. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921946&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091228 23:40:33

Bugs item #2922516, was opened at 20091228 17:06 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922516&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: Pending >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: maxima terminal: display limited to 80 columns Initial Comment: I have a widescreen monitor and I run maxima on a terminal emulator (yakuake) which spans the entire screen. Eventhough the terminal window is maximized, maxima's output appears to be limited to a width of 80 columns, which results in lengthy expressions being needlessly broken with a line break at the 80 character mark. It would be great if maxima made it possible for the users to take full advantage of their monitor's real estate by not imposing an artificial 80 column limit.  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20091228 18:40 Message: Look up the documentation for linel. Set linel to something larger. (It would be great if maxima could figure out the terminal width itself, but it can't.) Marking bug as pending/fixed.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922516&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091228 22:06:49

Bugs item #2922516, was opened at 20091228 22:06 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by rui_maciel You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922516&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: Rui Maciel (rui_maciel) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: maxima terminal: display limited to 80 columns Initial Comment: I have a widescreen monitor and I run maxima on a terminal emulator (yakuake) which spans the entire screen. Eventhough the terminal window is maximized, maxima's output appears to be limited to a width of 80 columns, which results in lengthy expressions being needlessly broken with a line break at the 80 character mark. It would be great if maxima made it possible for the users to take full advantage of their monitor's real estate by not imposing an artificial 80 column limit.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2922516&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091228 02:20:38

Bugs item #776441, was opened at 20030723 18:25 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=776441&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: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: orderlessp not transitive Initial Comment: l: [z+x*(x+2)+v+1,z+x^2+x+v+1,z+(x+1)^2+v]; orderlessp(l[1],l[2]) => True orderlessp(l[2],l[3]) => True orderlessp(l[1],l[3]) => False !!! More concise example: q: x^2; r: (x+1)^2; s: x*(x+2); orderlessp(q,r) => true orderlessp(r,s) => true orderlessp(s,q) => true That is, s<q<r<s. The problem is somewhere in the internal great function, which by the way does some strange things, in particular: why does ordlist have an explicit check for mplus: (RETURN (COND ((= L2 0) (EQ CX 'MPLUS)) (Thanks to Barton for his contributions to tracking this down.) Maxima 5.9.0 GCL 2.5.0  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20091228 02:20 Message: 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: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20091214 00:29 Message: I think these issues are resolved in simp.lisp rev 1.93.  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20060708 17:13 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Increasing the priority on this one  potential for subtle breakage in various contexts.  Comment By: Wolfgang Jenkner (wjenkner) Date: 20030808 23:50 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=581700 This one doesn't even involve MEXPT (I found it while checking one of the cases needed for proving that ORDLIST implements a consistent way of extending a given total order on a set of simplified expressions to their simplified sums and products. So it doesn't...) (C1) orderlessp(t/2,t); (D1) TRUE (C2) orderlessp(t,t+1/4); (D2) TRUE (C3) orderlessp(t/2,t+1/4); (D3) FALSE The point is that t/2 is ((MTIMES SIMP) ((RAT SIMP) 1 2) $t) and, lexicographically, we have (t, 1/2) < (t, 1), (t, 0) < (t, 1/4) and (t, 1/2, *) > (t, 1/4, +). So t corresponds to (t, 1) in the first comparison and to (t, 0) in the second comparison. Trouble. Floats instead of rational numbers give the same results, by the way. This one is more like Stavros's examples. (C1) orderlessp((x+1)^2,x^21); (D1) TRUE (C2) orderlessp(x^21,x^2); (D2) TRUE (C3) orderlessp((x+1)^2,x^2); (D3) FALSE Maybe powers whose exponents are positive integers should be treated like products. Actually, ORDMEXPT does this already but it isn't always called by ORDFN, for whatever reason. Anyway, here is the patch I'm currently experimenting with (it solves all the issues reported by Stavros and also the last example above, but in light of the other example it is certainly far from being a complete solution. It might even be totally wrong since I have no reason to believe that it is more than a simple palliative and that it would make things more consistent). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cut ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Index: simp.lisp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/maxima/maxima/src/simp.lisp,v retrieving revision 1.5 diff C2 r1.5 simp.lisp *** simp.lisp 5 Mar 2003 01:36:26 0000 1.5  simp.lisp 8 Aug 2003 19:10:57 0000 *************** *** 1848,1854 **** ((MEMQ CX '(MPLUS MTIMES)) (COND ((MEMQ CY '(MPLUS MTIMES)) (ORDLIST (CDR X) (CDR Y) CX CY)) ! ((ALIKE1 (SETQ U (CAR (LAST X))) Y) (NOT (ORDHACK X))) ! ((AND (EQ CX 'MPLUS) (EQ CY 'MEXPT) (MPLUSP (CADR Y))) (NOT (ORDMEXPT Y X))) (T (GREAT U Y)))) ((MEMQ CY '(MPLUS MTIMES)) (NOT (ORDFN Y X)))  1848,1854  ((MEMQ CX '(MPLUS MTIMES)) (COND ((MEMQ CY '(MPLUS MTIMES)) (ORDLIST (CDR X) (CDR Y) CX CY)) ! ((AND (EQ CX 'MPLUS) (EQ CY 'MEXPT)) (NOT (ORDMEXPT Y X))) + ((ALIKE1 (SETQ U (CAR (LAST X))) Y) (NOT (ORDHACK X))) (T (GREAT U Y)))) ((MEMQ CY '(MPLUS MTIMES)) (NOT (ORDFN Y X))) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ cut ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030805 04:35 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 More amusing consequences: q+r+s => (x+1)^2+x^2+x*(x+2) expand(%,0,0) => x^2+x*(x+2)+(x+1)^2 expand(%,0,0) => x*(x+2)+(x+1)^2+x^2 expand(%,0,0) => (x+1)^2+x^2+x*(x+2) q+r+srqs => (x+1)^2+x^2+x*(x+2)(x+1)^2x^2x* (x+2) expand(%,0,0) => x^2x^2 expand(%,0,0) => 0 I haven't found an example where simptimes fails, though. Fateman reports that this bug is also found in commercial Macsyma 2.4, and calls it a Methuselah bug because it has persisted for so long  presumably it has been around for 30+ years.  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030725 14:26 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 This not only screws up SORT etc., but even basic simplification, since simplus, simptimes, etc. depend on great: q+r+s => (x+1)^2+x^2+x*(x+2) q+s+r => x^2+x*(x+2)+(x+1)^2 (q+s+r)(q+s+r) => x^2x^2 (q+s+r)(s+q+r) => x^2x^2 (q+r+s)(q+s+r) => x (x + 2)  x (x + 2)  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=776441&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091228 02:20:29

Bugs item #2912391, was opened at 20091211 02:01 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2912391&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: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rudolf Vyborny (ynrobyvr) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: wrong result Initial Comment: Calculating the limit of x+sqrt(1+x^2) as x goes to  infinity gives the wrong result inf instead of correct answer 0  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20091228 02:20 Message: 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: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091213 17:50 Message: I am not sure about the notation of infinities which is used in this bug report. Maxima knows inf, minf, and infinity. infinity represents the complex infinity, inf and minf the real infinities.Furthermore, we have minf = inf. With these notations I get: (%i11) limit(x+sqrt(1+x^2),x,inf); (%o11) inf (%i12) limit(x+sqrt(1+x^2),x,inf); (%o12) 0 (%i13) limit(x+sqrt(1+x^2),x,minf); (%o13) 0 (%i14) limit(x+sqrt(1+x^2),x,infinity); (%o14) infinity I think all results from above are correct. Setting this bug report to pending and the status to "works for me". Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Martin (mhs) Date: 20091211 09:05 Message: I cannot reproduce this on  Maxima version: 5.19.2 Maxima build date: 8:55 8/31/2009 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.8  (%i1) expr: x+sqrt(1+x^2); (%o1) sqrt(x^2+1)+x (%i2) limit(expr, x, inf); (%o2) 0 (%i3) limit(expr, x, minf); (%o3) 0  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2912391&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091227 18:42:01

Bugs item #2921946, was opened at 20091227 19:42 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921946&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: Expansion of bessel_k(1/2,x) with radexpand:false Initial Comment: The correct result for the expansion of bessel_k(1/2,x) is sqrt(%pi/2)*exp(x)/sqrt(x) We get this result with Maxima too: (%i4) bessel_k(1/2,x),besselexpand:true; (%o4) sqrt(%pi)*%e^x/(sqrt(2)*sqrt(x)) All seems to be correct, but this is by accident, because Maxima does in general the wrong simplification sqrt(1/x) > 1/sqrt(x). We can see it, when we set the flag radexpand to false: (%i6) bessel_k(1/2,x),besselexpand:true,radexpand:false; (%o6) sqrt(%pi/(2*x))*%e^x Now we get a result with sqrt(1/x) and not 1/sqrt(x), because the simplification sqrt(1/x) > 1/sqrt(x) is switched off. If we evaluate the last expression for negative real numbers, we get a wrong sign. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921946&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091226 10:37:11

Bugs item #2921390, was opened at 20091226 10:37 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921390&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: Yes Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Console Interrupt error in wxmaxima Ubuntu 9.10 Initial Comment: Hi, I've installed maxima and wxmaxima in ubuntu 9.10 If i run maxima from terminal it seems ok but if I run wxmaxima I do not understand the reason why I haven't the prompt (%i1) I ran bug_report(); and this is the answer: Maxima encountered a Lisp error: Console interrupt. Automatically continuing. To reenable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. (%i1) The Maxima bug database is available at http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=104933&group_id=4933&func=browse Submit bug reports by following the 'Submit New' link on that page. Please include the following build information with your bug report:  Maxima version: 5.17.1 Maxima build date: 14:31 7/13/2009 host type: x86_64unknownlinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7  The above information is also available from the Maxima function build_info(). (%o1) Could you help me? Thanks in advance  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2921390&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091225 02:20:19

Bugs item #2911760, was opened at 20091210 03:22 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2911760&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: Problem not in Maxima Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: AKG (agehr) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: xmaxima breaks on Ubuntu 9.10 Initial Comment: (%i1) Maxima version: 5.17.1 Maxima build date: 14:9 7/13/2009 host type: i686pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7 Clicking on the first example in the tutorial results in: %i2) Universal error handler called recursively (:ERROR NIL CONDITIONS::CLCSUNIVERSALERRORHANDLER "" "Couldn't protect") Universal error handler called recursively (:ERROR NIL CONDITIONS::CLCSUNIVERSALERRORHANDLER "" "Couldn't protect") Maxima encountered a Lisp error: Error in CONDITIONS::CLCSUNIVERSALERRORHANDLER [or a callee]: Caught fatal error [memory may be damaged] Automatically continuing. To reenable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. (%i3) Other simple tasks deliver similar error messages. Wxmaxima also gives similar results. This appears to be a problem introduced with Ubuntu 9.10. I didn't have a problem with 9.04. I removed and reinstalled maxima and got the same results.  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20091225 02:20 Message: 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: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20091210 17:36 Message: This is a problem with the Ubuntu package and not with Maxima itself. Get Ubuntu to provide a working version.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2911760&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091225 02:20:18

Bugs item #2912067, was opened at 20091210 15:44 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2912067&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: Problem not in Maxima Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: CLCSUNIVERSALERRORHANDLER Initial Comment: A crash occurred entering "factor (x^6  1)" which is an example given in the Introduction to the Maxima Manual. A screen shot is attached. Maxima version: 5.17.1 Maxima build date: 14:31 7/13/2009 host type: x86_64unknownlinuxgnu (Ubuntu 9.10) lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.7  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20091225 02:20 Message: 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: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20091210 17:29 Message: There have been quite bugs related to Ubuntu's distribution of gcl and/or maxima. This is not a bug in maxima per se. Try using a different lisp or building your own or getting Ubuntu to provide a working version.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2912067&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091223 20:08:26

Bugs item #2914296, was opened at 20091214 12:30 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2914296&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: Jaime E. Villate (villate) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Limit gets Maxima stuck Initial Comment: The following limit makes Maxima 5.20 enter an endless loop: limit( (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2),x,0); In version 5.19.0 the loop ended with a wrong result "minf". The correct result is 5/7.  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20091223 15:08 Message: Fixed in limit.lisp rev 1.89  though still very slow. (%i4) limit( (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2),x,0); (%o4) 5/7 (%i5) time(%); (%o5) [33.41]  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091223 04:03 Message: updated comment: (%i1) (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2)$ define(f(x),%); (%o2) f(x):=(log(x^2+1)+2*cos(x)2)/(sin(x)^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2) (%i3) /* error */ limit(f(x),x,0); (%o3) inf (%i4) taylor(f(x),x,0,5); limit(%,x,0); (%o4) 5/7(163*x^2)/245+(86603*x^4)/205800+... (%o5) 5/7 (%i6) limit(f(1/n),n,inf); (%o6) 5/7 (%i7) limit(f(sqrt(x)),x,0); (%o7) 5/7 (%i12) wxplot2d([f(x)], [x,1.5,1.5], [gnuplot_preamble, "set grid;"], [ylabel, "f(x)"]),wxplot_size=[300,300]$ plot2d: expression evaluates to nonnumeric value somewhere in plotting range. (%t12) << Graphics >> (%i9) build_info()$ Maxima version: 5.19.2 Maxima build date: 8:55 8/31/2009 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.8 aleksas.domarkas@...  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091222 17:51 Message: (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2)$ taylor(%,x,0,5)$ limit(%,x,0); 5/7  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091214 15:13 Message: For the record: lhospital generates the following expression when trying to find the limit of the example of this bug report: (%o28) 3*x^2/(x^4*(87*sin(x)^287*cos(x)^2+48*sqrt(1x^2)) +x^8*(4*sin(x)^24*cos(x)^2)3*sin(x)^2 +x^2*(28*sin(x)^2+28*cos(x)^244*sqrt(1x^2)) +x^6*(60*cos(x)^260*sin(x)^2)56*x^7*cos(x)*sin(x) +152*x^5*cos(x)*sin(x)110*x^3*cos(x)*sin(x)+14*x*cos(x)*sin(x) +3*cos(x)^2+4*sqrt(1x^2)) Then the routine limit is called again, but it returns never. We can do it directly with the above expression: (%i29) limit(expr,x,0); ^CMaxima encountered a Lisp error: EXT:GC: User break Automatically continuing. To enable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. I have no idea what is the problem. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2914296&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091223 17:31:45

Bugs item #2920190, was opened at 20091223 11:31 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by willisbl You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2920190&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: 1 Private: No Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: noninteger value for maxposex Initial Comment: Maxima shouldn't allow a noninteger value for maxposex and maxnegex. (%i1) maxposex : a; (%o1) a Error message is clear: (%i4) expand(a*(b+c)); Maxposex must be a nonnegativeinteger: a Error message is unclear: (%i5) ev(a*(b+c), expand); Maxima encountered a Lisp error: Error in MACSYMATOPLEVEL [or a callee]: $A is not of type NUMBER.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2920190&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091223 09:03:34

Bugs item #2914296, was opened at 20091214 19:30 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by alex108 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2914296&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Jaime E. Villate (villate) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Limit gets Maxima stuck Initial Comment: The following limit makes Maxima 5.20 enter an endless loop: limit( (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2),x,0); In version 5.19.0 the loop ended with a wrong result "minf". The correct result is 5/7.  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091223 11:03 Message: updated comment: (%i1) (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2)$ define(f(x),%); (%o2) f(x):=(log(x^2+1)+2*cos(x)2)/(sin(x)^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2) (%i3) /* error */ limit(f(x),x,0); (%o3) inf (%i4) taylor(f(x),x,0,5); limit(%,x,0); (%o4) 5/7(163*x^2)/245+(86603*x^4)/205800+... (%o5) 5/7 (%i6) limit(f(1/n),n,inf); (%o6) 5/7 (%i7) limit(f(sqrt(x)),x,0); (%o7) 5/7 (%i12) wxplot2d([f(x)], [x,1.5,1.5], [gnuplot_preamble, "set grid;"], [ylabel, "f(x)"]),wxplot_size=[300,300]$ plot2d: expression evaluates to nonnumeric value somewhere in plotting range. (%t12) << Graphics >> (%i9) build_info()$ Maxima version: 5.19.2 Maxima build date: 8:55 8/31/2009 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) lispimplementationversion: GCL 2.6.8 aleksas.domarkas@...  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091223 00:51 Message: (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2)$ taylor(%,x,0,5)$ limit(%,x,0); 5/7  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091214 22:13 Message: For the record: lhospital generates the following expression when trying to find the limit of the example of this bug report: (%o28) 3*x^2/(x^4*(87*sin(x)^287*cos(x)^2+48*sqrt(1x^2)) +x^8*(4*sin(x)^24*cos(x)^2)3*sin(x)^2 +x^2*(28*sin(x)^2+28*cos(x)^244*sqrt(1x^2)) +x^6*(60*cos(x)^260*sin(x)^2)56*x^7*cos(x)*sin(x) +152*x^5*cos(x)*sin(x)110*x^3*cos(x)*sin(x)+14*x*cos(x)*sin(x) +3*cos(x)^2+4*sqrt(1x^2)) Then the routine limit is called again, but it returns never. We can do it directly with the above expression: (%i29) limit(expr,x,0); ^CMaxima encountered a Lisp error: EXT:GC: User break Automatically continuing. To enable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. I have no idea what is the problem. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2914296&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091222 22:51:12

Bugs item #2914296, was opened at 20091214 19:30 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by alex108 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2914296&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Jaime E. Villate (villate) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Limit gets Maxima stuck Initial Comment: The following limit makes Maxima 5.20 enter an endless loop: limit( (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2),x,0); In version 5.19.0 the loop ended with a wrong result "minf". The correct result is 5/7.  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091223 00:51 Message: (log(1+x^2)2+2*cos(x))/((sin(x))^2+2*sqrt(1x^2)2)$ taylor(%,x,0,5)$ limit(%,x,0); 5/7  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20091214 22:13 Message: For the record: lhospital generates the following expression when trying to find the limit of the example of this bug report: (%o28) 3*x^2/(x^4*(87*sin(x)^287*cos(x)^2+48*sqrt(1x^2)) +x^8*(4*sin(x)^24*cos(x)^2)3*sin(x)^2 +x^2*(28*sin(x)^2+28*cos(x)^244*sqrt(1x^2)) +x^6*(60*cos(x)^260*sin(x)^2)56*x^7*cos(x)*sin(x) +152*x^5*cos(x)*sin(x)110*x^3*cos(x)*sin(x)+14*x*cos(x)*sin(x) +3*cos(x)^2+4*sqrt(1x^2)) Then the routine limit is called again, but it returns never. We can do it directly with the above expression: (%i29) limit(expr,x,0); ^CMaxima encountered a Lisp error: EXT:GC: User break Automatically continuing. To enable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil. I have no idea what is the problem. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2914296&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091222 21:56:47

Bugs item #2919296, was opened at 20091222 13:51 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by alex108 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2919296&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: binomial sums Initial Comment: wanted to use this in my teaching but... load(simplify_sum); sum(binomial(n,x)*p^x*(1p)^(nx),x,0,n); simplify_sum(%) 0 sum(binomial(n,x)*0.3^x*(10.3)^(nx),x,0,n); simplify_sum(%); rat: replaced 0.3 by 3/10 = 0.3 rat: replaced 0.7 by 7/10 = 0.7 rat: replaced 0.7 by 7/10 = 0.7 1  Comment By: Aleksas Domarkas (alex108) Date: 20091222 23:56 Message: Do it like this: load(simplify_sum); sum(binomial(n,x)*p^x*q^(nx),x,0,n); simplify_sum(%) (p+q)^n  Comment By: Andrej Vodopivec (andrejv) Date: 20091222 16:57 Message: This is a bug in the implementation of the Gosper algorithm from the Zeilberger package. A workaround for simplify_sum is to set Gosper_in_Zeilberger to false.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2919296&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20091222 20:41:11

Bugs item #2892710, was opened at 20091105 16:26 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by l_butler You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2892710&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: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Allow easier library access Initial Comment: Currently, to use Maxima as a Lisp ibrary requires (setpathnames) in the file src/initcl.lisp to load packages, but this has an unbound variable *maximalangsubdir* which is only set in another method which is only run when Maxima is actually run. This ticket would add an error catch in setpathnames to check the case where *maximalangsubdir* is neither NIL nor an actual path, by invoking (setq *maximalangsubdir* nil) wherever appropriate.  Comment By: Leo Butler (l_butler) Date: 20091222 17:47 Message: I have initialized the variable in question in src/initcl.lisp: (defvar *maximalangsubdir* nil) I believe this fixes the problem and I am closing the report.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2892710&group_id=4933 