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}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 



1
(2) 
2
(3) 
3
(12) 
4
(12) 
5
(6) 
6
(1) 
7
(2) 
8

9
(3) 
10
(4) 
11
(4) 
12
(6) 
13
(3) 
14
(1) 
15
(4) 
16

17

18

19
(6) 
20
(5) 
21

22
(2) 
23
(1) 
24
(4) 
25

26

27
(1) 
28

29
(2) 
30
(1) 



From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100624 19:57:27

Bugs item #3020243, was opened at 20100623 11:53 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020243&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core  Integration Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: defint(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x,0,2*%pi) wrong result 0 Initial Comment: The correct result is 2*%pi. This is a new bug appearing in version 5.21.1. Previous versions (<= 5.20.1 ) return just the integral expression unevaluated, which is fair enough, but most importantly is not a wrong result. Maxima version: 5.21.1 Maxima build date: 8:13 4/26/2010 Host type: i686pcmingw32 also on linux system (fedora11) Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) also with cmucl Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8 also with cmucl 19f  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100624 15:57 Message: Expanding does produce a better answer. The derivative does equal the integrand. Plotting realpart(%o3 )shows a discontinuity near %pi. (Perhaps it's a bug, but plot2d(%o3,[x,0,%pi]) produces a warning that a nonnumeric value occurs somewhere. It seems as if it occurs everywhere except at 0.)  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100624 14:42 Message: We get a more simple result when expanding the function gamma_incomplete: (%i3) integrate(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x),gamma_expand:true; (%o3) (%i*expintegral_ei(%e^(%i*x))%i*expintegral_ei(%e^(%i*x)))/2 I think this result is correct, as a reference I have compared the result with wolfram alpha. But nevertheless, the definite integral is wrong and I am wondering why the conjugate function is introduced in the unsimplified result. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100624 14:18 Message: This particular integral is evaluated by computing the antiderivative. Perhaps in earlier versions, maxima could not, but maxima can now. So integrate(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x) returns: (%i*conjugate(gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) %i*conjugate(gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) %i*gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))+%i*gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) /4 Somehow this doesn't look right. Don't know if this is the correct antiderivative or not, but that's how maxima gets zero for the answer. At x=0, the result is zero, and by periodicity x=2*%pi is also zero. The wrong branch cut is taken, assuming the antiderivative is correct.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020243&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100624 18:42:51

Bugs item #3020243, was opened at 20100623 17:53 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020243&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core  Integration Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: defint(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x,0,2*%pi) wrong result 0 Initial Comment: The correct result is 2*%pi. This is a new bug appearing in version 5.21.1. Previous versions (<= 5.20.1 ) return just the integral expression unevaluated, which is fair enough, but most importantly is not a wrong result. Maxima version: 5.21.1 Maxima build date: 8:13 4/26/2010 Host type: i686pcmingw32 also on linux system (fedora11) Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) also with cmucl Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8 also with cmucl 19f  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100624 20:42 Message: We get a more simple result when expanding the function gamma_incomplete: (%i3) integrate(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x),gamma_expand:true; (%o3) (%i*expintegral_ei(%e^(%i*x))%i*expintegral_ei(%e^(%i*x)))/2 I think this result is correct, as a reference I have compared the result with wolfram alpha. But nevertheless, the definite integral is wrong and I am wondering why the conjugate function is introduced in the unsimplified result. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100624 20:18 Message: This particular integral is evaluated by computing the antiderivative. Perhaps in earlier versions, maxima could not, but maxima can now. So integrate(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x) returns: (%i*conjugate(gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) %i*conjugate(gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) %i*gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))+%i*gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) /4 Somehow this doesn't look right. Don't know if this is the correct antiderivative or not, but that's how maxima gets zero for the answer. At x=0, the result is zero, and by periodicity x=2*%pi is also zero. The wrong branch cut is taken, assuming the antiderivative is correct.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020243&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100624 18:18:39

Bugs item #3020243, was opened at 20100623 11:53 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020243&group_id=4933 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Lisp Core  Integration Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: defint(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x,0,2*%pi) wrong result 0 Initial Comment: The correct result is 2*%pi. This is a new bug appearing in version 5.21.1. Previous versions (<= 5.20.1 ) return just the integral expression unevaluated, which is fair enough, but most importantly is not a wrong result. Maxima version: 5.21.1 Maxima build date: 8:13 4/26/2010 Host type: i686pcmingw32 also on linux system (fedora11) Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) also with cmucl Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8 also with cmucl 19f  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100624 14:18 Message: This particular integral is evaluated by computing the antiderivative. Perhaps in earlier versions, maxima could not, but maxima can now. So integrate(exp(cos(x))*cos(sin(x)),x) returns: (%i*conjugate(gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) %i*conjugate(gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) %i*gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))+%i*gamma_incomplete(0,%e^(%i*x))) /4 Somehow this doesn't look right. Don't know if this is the correct antiderivative or not, but that's how maxima gets zero for the answer. At x=0, the result is zero, and by periodicity x=2*%pi is also zero. The wrong branch cut is taken, assuming the antiderivative is correct.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020243&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100624 03:46:15

Bugs item #3020589, was opened at 20100624 13:46 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by peterc_555 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020589&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: Peter Cusack (peterc_555) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: xlabel and ylabel don't change plot3d axis labels Initial Comment: WhenI use plot2d(Bxt(x,0),[x,0,Rs*2],[xlabel,"x [m]"],[ylabel,"Bx [T]"],[legend,"0mm"])$ the label on the x axis is changed as I expect. When I use plot3d(Bxt(x,r),[x,0,L],[r,0,R],[xlabel,"x [m]"],[ylabel,"r [m]"],[zlabel,"Bx [T]"],[legend,"Axial field"])$ only the z axis label is changed. The x axis label is simply "x" and the y axis is simply "r" as picked up from the expression. Manually editing maxout.gnuplot (from wxMaxima) works, so it doesn't seem like gnuplot ignores the input. Maxima version: 5.21.1 Maxima build date: 8:13 4/26/2010 Host type: i686pcmingw32 Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3020589&group_id=4933 