ÞÅÔ×ÅÒÇ, 1 Á×ÇÕÓÔÁ 2013 Ç. ÐÏÌØÚÏ×ÁÔÅÌØ š<reduce-algebra-developers-request@lists.sourceforge.net> ÐÉÓÁÌ:
> Send Reduce-algebra-developers mailing list submissions to
> š š š š reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> š š š š https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reduce-algebra-developers
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> š š š š reduce-algebra-developers-request@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> š š š š reduce-algebra-developers-owner@lists.sourceforge.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Reduce-algebra-developers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> š š1. Re: reduce-algebra vs Mathematica (Tony Roberts)
> š š2. reduce file vim support (Peng Yu)
> š š3. Re: reduce file vim support (Arthur Norman)
> š š4. Re: reduce-algebra vs Mathematica (Raffaele Vitolo)
> š š5. Re: REDUCE error complaints (Rainer Sch?pf)
> š š6. Recent Updates to crack package (Rainer Sch?pf)
> š š7. Re: Recent Updates to crack package (Rainer Sch?pf)
> š š8. Rule f1(~x)+f1(~y)=> f(x+y) for Reduce (abpetrov)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 10:20:28 +0930
> From: Tony Roberts <anthony.roberts@adelaide.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: [Reduce-algebra-developers] reduce-algebra vs Mathematica
> To: reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <51C4F4D4.5020303@adelaide.edu.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi all,
>
> I had a student who was keen on Mathematica, so I set him the side
> challenge of comparing it with Reduce on the class of problems we were
> doing. šThe following is our conclusion (finally due to be published
> soon in the J. Engrg Maths)
>
> Tony
>
> Reduce was much faster š šComputational experiments found that the
> computer algebra package Reduce was at least an order of magnitude
> faster than Mathematica. Table 3 lists the computational time for the
> Reduce and the Mathematica implementation for constructing O???4,?2??
> holistic models of the one dimensional Ginzburg?Landau equation with
> subgrid resolutions of 2, 4, 8 and 16 subgrid intervals. These times
> were observed on a Pentium III, 750MHz processor, with 256 Mb ram,
> running Reduce 3.7, under Windows XP. Table 3 shows the Reduce
> implementation was 20?70 times faster than the Mathematica
> implementation (even with the repeated help of the Mathematica news
> group). Thus we use the free package Reduce [18].
>
> Table 3: Reduce and Mathematica computational times for numerical
> construction of O???4,?2?? holistic models of the one dimensional
> Ginzburg?Landau equation for various subgrid scale resolutions, n.
> n Reduce Mathematica
> 2 1.1s 70.2s
> 4 3.1s 215.4s
> 8 8.3s 367.6s
> 16 23.7s š517.7 s
>
> On 22/06/13 5:51 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> My question is not a developer question. But the forum on sf is
>> just inconvenience to use.
>>
>> Reduce-algebra is very capable and free (but the gui is bad, it
>> fa. There are recent papers using it. But it is Mathematica is more
>> used. Has anybody compared the pros and cons of reduce-algebra vs
>> Mathematica? (I don't find a comparison.) Thanks.
>>
>
> - --
> - ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Professor A.J. Roberts
> School of Mathematical Sciences šphone: +61 8 8313 3035
> University of Adelaide š š š š š fax: š +61 8 8313 3696
> South Australia 5005. š š š š š šmailto:anthony.roberts@adelaide.edu.au
> http://www.maths.adelaide.edu.au/anthony.roberts/
> ==.0000001000000100000110001000011010001111110010111011101000010000==
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlHE9NQACgkQ7TX8dTbro1vlawCfSbqwDmooT4wlivCai2hqjmWh
> 07UAnRMuwc4lXVHPoEtnGeWj5hk/Npfs
> =vh2h
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 23:30:06 -0500
> From: Peng Yu <pengyu.ut@gmail.com>
> Subject: [Reduce-algebra-developers] reduce file vim support
> To: reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID:
> š š š š <CABrM6wkCF7x50_8fKhagzoEHO6RDaYdDwYGEo3z--6u59fi2rg@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering if there are any vim files (syntax and indent) for
> reduce. It would be helpful if one can point me where they are if they
> are available.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Peng
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 07:55:10 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time)
> From: Arthur Norman <acn1@cam.ac.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Reduce-algebra-developers] reduce file vim support
> To: Peng Yu <pengyu.ut@gmail.com>
> Cc: reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <alpine.WNT.2.00.1306220752310.5688@panamint>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Peng Yu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm wondering if there are any vim files (syntax and indent) for
>> reduce. It would be helpful if one can point me where they are if they
>> are available.
>>
> There are emacs ones (in the source tree look in generic/emacs) and maybe
> some useful person would look at those and submit back to us vim
> sort of equivalent?
> š š š Arthur
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 23:41:00 +0200
> From: Raffaele Vitolo <raffaele.vitolo@unisalento.it>
> Subject: Re: [Reduce-algebra-developers] reduce-algebra vs Mathematica
> To: reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <51C76B6C.4010408@unisalento.it>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Dear All,
>
> I started to use Reduce a few years ago for computations on PDEs
> ("integrable systems").
>
> First of all I'd like to say that GUI is completely useless for
> intensive scientific computation; however, it might be comfortable for
> beginners or for occasional users.
>
>>> There are recent papers using it. But it is Mathematica is more used.
>>> Has anybody compared the pros and cons of reduce-algebra vs
>>> Mathematica? (I don't find a comparison.) Thanks.
>
> As an example, in my computations I had to deal with rational functions
> of many variables and denominators of degree ~20. Together with a
> colleague we tried the same computation on Mathematica and Reduce, it
> was the sum of two rational functions as above; it was impossible to
> finish it it Mathematica, while Reduce produced a correct result in a
> reasonable time. Another feature that I like so much in Reduce is the
> fact that expressions are always evaluated keeping into account all
> existing rules. I do not think that this behaviour is so easy to
> reproduce in Mathematica. If you work with a lot of algebraic
> constraints this is an essential feature.
>
> I also think that the Reduce user base is much wider than what is shown
> by the activity on this mailing list, I know a lot of users who are not
> active here.
>
>> I think that different people are motivated by very different aspects of
>> the two systems. Here is my start at a few thoughts, but note very well
>> that somebody employed by Mathematica or Maple, or working on Axiom, or
>> who had used Maxima for years and years would put things differently (and
>> could still be right!). You specifically ask about Mathematica but I may
>> raise points that put Reduce in a broader context of other systems too...
>
> I think that the economic aspect is important but it is minor with
> respect to:
> 1 - having the possibility to learn from source code;
> 2 - having an almost immediate reaction from the community about bug fixing.
> In particular I was always strongly and timely helped by Arthur Norman
> who fixed several problems in Reduce that I noticed in quite complicated
> computations, using many GB of ram. I think that also commercial
> programs like Mathematica suffer from the presence of lots of bugs; I do
> not think that the support of Mathematica would be as fast as the
> support from the free software community.
>
> I'm not fond of ideologies, but I do not think that there is anything
> better than free software for learning/teaching/scientific purposes.
>
> Raffaele.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 02:05:50 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Rainer Sch?pf <rainer.schoepf@gmx.net>
> Subject: Re: [Reduce-algebra-developers] REDUCE error complaints
> To: Jarmo Hietarinta <hietarin@utu.fi>
> Cc: "reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net"
> š š š š <reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net>
> Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306290158590.1385@wintermute.proteosys>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 at 14:07 -0000, Jarmo Hietarinta wrote:
>
> š> Dear REDUCE developers,
> š>
> š> > There are maybe several categories of Reduce users:
> š> > (1) One where however large or serious their work is it happens that
> š> > recent upgrades and bug-fixes are not especially important for their
> š> > usage. Such people can range from small scale casual users to those who
> š> > have used Reduce since the 1970s - if versions from the 70s, 80s and 90s
> š> > were useful for them it could be that increments over the last while are
> š> > not that vital but stability may matter more!
> š>
> š> I belong to this category, having worked with Reduce since 1982 and still almost daily.
> š> I am glad to know that Reduce is still being developed and bugs fixed.
> š>
> š> I wonder whether you could with the new version also eliminate some annoying features, namely:
> š>
> š> 1) When I give command part(xx,yy) and xx does not have that many parts, Reduce respond by printing the whole (humongous) expression
> š>
> š> *** Expression a**12 + 12*a**11*(b + c + d + 1) + 66*a**10*(b**2 + 2*b*c + 2*b*d
> š> ----------- hundreds of lines -------------
> š> 10 + 220*d**9 + 495*d**8 + 792*d**7 + 924*d**6 + 792*d**5 + 495*d**4 + 220*d**3
> š> + 66*d**2 + 12*d + 1 does not have part 500
> š>
> š> Printing the long expression prevents me from seeing previous calculation and is not very informative either.
> š> It would be quite sufficient to print "*** The expression given does not have part 500"
> š>
> š> The same behaviour is with "factorize" and perhaps it is a deep general feature.
> š> The default should be a more laconic error statement without printing the whole expression.
>
> That's a good idea, at least in interactive mode. šI think we should store the
> expression in some global variable and print something like
>
> š *** Expression errexpr!* does not have part 500
>
> With "off int", I'd rather print the complete expression.
>
> Note that the whole error printing mechanism needs some work; we've just come
> across another cases where the error message is lost completely when an error
> is caught. Storing the expression would help here as well.
>
> š Rainer
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 02:18:39 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Rainer Sch?pf <rainer.schoepf@gmx.net>
> Subject: [Reduce-algebra-developers] Recent Updates to crack package
> To: reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306290207060.1385@wintermute.proteosys>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> The test files for packages crack, conlaw and applysym do no longer match the
> test output; the liepdf test file never ends.
>
> Could this please be corrected?
>
> š š Rainer
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 11:28:15 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Rainer Sch?pf <rainer.schoepf@gmx.net>
> Subject: Re: [Reduce-algebra-developers] Recent Updates to crack
> š š š š package
> To: reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID:
> š š š š <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306291126390.3352@localhost6.localdomain6>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
> Addendum: the test output for the crack package test file differs between the
> CSL and PSL runs. A bad sign, I believe.
>
> š Rainer
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:59:35 +0000
> From: abpetrov <abpetrov@ufacom.ru>
> Subject: [Reduce-algebra-developers] Rule f1(~x)+f1(~y)=> f(x+y) for
> š š š š Reduce
> To: reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> Message-ID: <51FA3187.5040703@ufacom.ru>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi,
> I am new in Reduce, so I ask forgive me this question, it is may be simple.
> I am trying to define rule for an operator
>
> operator f1;
> r1 := {f1(~x)+f1(~y)=> f(x+y)};
>
> but when i try to use it
>
> ( f1(x) + f1(y) where r1 );
>
> i have error message
>
> ***** Unmatched free variable(s) ~y
>
> Is it possible to define rule for such operation ( not for
> f(~x+~y)=>f(x)+f(y), there isn't problem here)?
>
>
> So please help me.
>
> Best regards, Petrov Alexander.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Get your SQL database under version control now!
> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent
> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under
> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Reduce-algebra-developers mailing list
> Reduce-algebra-developers@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reduce-algebra-developers
>
>
> End of Reduce-algebra-developers Digest, Vol 33, Issue 1
> ********************************************************
>

--

ó Õ×ÁÖÅÎÉÅÍ,š

áËÓÁÎÙÞ áÎÄÒÅÊ,
8-916-070-6161,š
aksanych@gmail.com

Skype: aksanych