You can subscribe to this list here.
2009 
_{Jan}
(2) 
_{Feb}
(5) 
_{Mar}

_{Apr}

_{May}
(2) 
_{Jun}
(8) 
_{Jul}
(4) 
_{Aug}

_{Sep}

_{Oct}
(2) 
_{Nov}
(6) 
_{Dec}


2010 
_{Jan}
(1) 
_{Feb}
(1) 
_{Mar}
(3) 
_{Apr}
(2) 
_{May}
(2) 
_{Jun}
(2) 
_{Jul}
(18) 
_{Aug}
(13) 
_{Sep}
(7) 
_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}
(2) 
2011 
_{Jan}

_{Feb}
(11) 
_{Mar}

_{Apr}
(4) 
_{May}

_{Jun}
(1) 
_{Jul}
(18) 
_{Aug}
(16) 
_{Sep}
(12) 
_{Oct}
(12) 
_{Nov}
(19) 
_{Dec}
(42) 
2012 
_{Jan}
(16) 
_{Feb}
(3) 
_{Mar}
(8) 
_{Apr}
(14) 
_{May}
(30) 
_{Jun}
(5) 
_{Jul}
(7) 
_{Aug}
(3) 
_{Sep}
(10) 
_{Oct}
(4) 
_{Nov}
(10) 
_{Dec}
(1) 
2013 
_{Jan}
(14) 
_{Feb}
(8) 
_{Mar}
(5) 
_{Apr}
(3) 
_{May}
(9) 
_{Jun}
(19) 
_{Jul}

_{Aug}
(27) 
_{Sep}
(5) 
_{Oct}
(18) 
_{Nov}
(12) 
_{Dec}
(8) 
2014 
_{Jan}
(5) 
_{Feb}
(8) 
_{Mar}
(20) 
_{Apr}
(22) 
_{May}
(28) 
_{Jun}
(9) 
_{Jul}
(6) 
_{Aug}
(35) 
_{Sep}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 





1
(8) 
2

3

4

5

6
(3) 
7
(2) 
8

9

10
(1) 
11

12
(2) 
13
(2) 
14
(2) 
15
(1) 
16
(1) 
17
(1) 
18
(1) 
19

20

21
(2) 
22
(1) 
23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

From: Rainer Schöpf <rainer.schoepf@gm...>  20130801 20:18:17

On Thu, 1 Aug 2013 at 20:05 0000, abpetrov wrote: > I made attempt with program > > load_package pm; > operator f1; > s(f1(x) + f1(y),f1(?x) + f1(?y)−>f1(x+y)); > > And then I got next error message > > ***** (? y) invalid as operator It took me a while to understand the problem: you are using a nonASCII character (Unicode \u2212) instead of a minus sign in ">". If you use the minus sign it works. Rainer 
From: Francis Wright <f.wright@li...>  20130801 18:13:04

trigsimp(cos(x)*tan(x)); works for me. Francis From: tk [mailto:tk@...] Sent: 01 August 2013 5:31 pm To: reducealgebradevelopers@... Subject: [Reducealgebradevelopers] Trig Simplifications / Reductions Hello All, I have been trying to work out if two trig expressions are equivalent. After getting tired of trying it manually, it crossed my mind that REDUCE might be able to help here. But even after switching on "trigsimp", the output is still not reduced to its simplest form, i.e. if I enter : a = Cos(x)*Tan(x) I will not get an output line of : a = Sin(x). What do I need to do here to rationalise sums of long trig quotients ? Kind Regards, TK.  Die Sonne scheint noch.  Sophie Scholl (19211943). 
From: tk <tk@br...>  20130801 16:46:39

Hello All, I have been trying to work out if two trig expressions are equivalent. After getting tired of trying it manually, it crossed my mind that REDUCE might be able to help here. But even after switching on "trigsimp", the output is still not reduced to its simplest form, i.e. if I enter : a = Cos(x)*Tan(x) I will not get an output line of : a = Sin(x). What do I need to do here to rationalise sums of long trig quotients ? Kind Regards, TK.  /*Die Sonne scheint noch.* / / Sophie Scholl (19211943)./ 
From: abpetrov <abpetrov@uf...>  20130801 14:32:27

this program work operator f1, ff; r1 := {ff( f1(~x)+f1(~y))=> ff( f1(x+y))}; p := f1(x) + f1(y); p2 := ( ff(p) where r1 ); part( p2, 1); but I must declare dummy operator ff Best Regards Petrov Alexander 
From: abpetrov <abpetrov@uf...>  20130801 14:05:34

01.08.2013 05:36, Rainer Schöpf пишет: > On Thu, 1 Aug 2013 at 09:59 0000, abpetrov wrote: > > > 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)? > > I'm afraid that this is not possible with the rule mechanism (see section 11.2.5 > of the Reduce manual for an explanation). > > Instead you could try the user contributed pm module, documented in > > packages/pm/pm.txt > > Hope that helps > Rainer > I made attempt with program load_package pm; operator f1; s(f1(x) + f1(y),f1(?x) + f1(?y)−>f1(x+y)); And then I got next error message ***** (? y) invalid as operator I suppose I can do what I want with operator part, but I don't like this solution. Best Regards Petrov Alexander 
From: Rainer Schöpf <rainer.schoepf@gm...>  20130801 05:36:39

On Thu, 1 Aug 2013 at 09:59 0000, abpetrov wrote: > 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)? I'm afraid that this is not possible with the rule mechanism (see section 11.2.5 of the Reduce manual for an explanation). Instead you could try the user contributed pm module, documented in packages/pm/pm.txt Hope that helps Rainer 
From: Andrew Aksanych <aksanych@gm...>  20130801 05:36:10

четверг, 1 августа 2013 г. пользователь < reducealgebradevelopersrequest@...> писал: > Send Reducealgebradevelopers mailing list submissions to > reducealgebradevelopers@... > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reducealgebradevelopers > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > reducealgebradevelopersrequest@... > > You can reach the person managing the list at > reducealgebradevelopersowner@... > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Reducealgebradevelopers digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: reducealgebra vs Mathematica (Tony Roberts) > 2. reduce file vim support (Peng Yu) > 3. Re: reduce file vim support (Arthur Norman) > 4. Re: reducealgebra vs Mathematica (Raffaele Vitolo) > 5. Re: REDUCE error complaints (Rainer Sch?pf) > 6. Recent Updates to crack package (Rainer Sch?pf) > 7. Re: Recent Updates to crack package (Rainer Sch?pf) > 8. 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@...> > Subject: Re: [Reducealgebradevelopers] reducealgebra vs Mathematica > To: reducealgebradevelopers@... > MessageID: <51C4F4D4.5020303@...> > ContentType: text/plain; charset=ISO88591 > > > 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. The following is our conclusion (finally due to be published > soon in the J. Engrg Maths) > > Tony > > Reduce was much faster Computational 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 517.7 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. >> >> Reducealgebra 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 reducealgebra vs >> Mathematica? (I don't find a comparison.) Thanks. >> > >   >   > Professor A.J. Roberts > School of Mathematical Sciences phone: +61 8 8313 3035 > University of Adelaide fax: +61 8 8313 3696 > South Australia 5005. mailto:anthony.roberts@... > 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@...> > Subject: [Reducealgebradevelopers] reduce file vim support > To: reducealgebradevelopers@... > MessageID: > < CABrM6wkCF7x50_8fKhagzoEHO6RDaYdDwYGEo3z6u59fi2rg@...> > ContentType: text/plain; charset=ISO88591 > > 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@...> > Subject: Re: [Reducealgebradevelopers] reduce file vim support > To: Peng Yu <pengyu.ut@...> > Cc: reducealgebradevelopers@... > MessageID: <alpine.WNT.2.00.1306220752310.5688@...> > ContentType: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=USASCII; 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? > Arthur > > > > >  > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 23:41:00 +0200 > From: Raffaele Vitolo <raffaele.vitolo@...> > Subject: Re: [Reducealgebradevelopers] reducealgebra vs Mathematica > To: reducealgebradevelopers@... > MessageID: <51C76B6C.4010408@...> > ContentType: text/plain; charset=ISO88591; 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 reducealgebra 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@...> > Subject: Re: [Reducealgebradevelopers] REDUCE error complaints > To: Jarmo Hietarinta <hietarin@...> > Cc: "reducealgebradevelopers@..." > <reducealgebradevelopers@...> > MessageID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306290158590.1385@...> > ContentType: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=USASCII > > On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 at 14:07 0000, Jarmo Hietarinta wrote: > > > Dear REDUCE developers, > > > > > There are maybe several categories of Reduce users: > > > (1) One where however large or serious their work is it happens that > > > recent upgrades and bugfixes are not especially important for their > > > usage. Such people can range from small scale casual users to those who > > > have used Reduce since the 1970s  if versions from the 70s, 80s and 90s > > > were useful for them it could be that increments over the last while are > > > not that vital but stability may matter more! > > > > I belong to this category, having worked with Reduce since 1982 and still almost daily. > > I am glad to know that Reduce is still being developed and bugs fixed. > > > > I wonder whether you could with the new version also eliminate some annoying features, namely: > > > > 1) When I give command part(xx,yy) and xx does not have that many parts, Reduce respond by printing the whole (humongous) expression > > > > *** Expression a**12 + 12*a**11*(b + c + d + 1) + 66*a**10*(b**2 + 2*b*c + 2*b*d > >  hundreds of lines  > > 10 + 220*d**9 + 495*d**8 + 792*d**7 + 924*d**6 + 792*d**5 + 495*d**4 + 220*d**3 > > + 66*d**2 + 12*d + 1 does not have part 500 > > > > Printing the long expression prevents me from seeing previous calculation and is not very informative either. > > It would be quite sufficient to print "*** The expression given does not have part 500" > > > > The same behaviour is with "factorize" and perhaps it is a deep general feature. > > The default should be a more laconic error statement without printing the whole expression. > > That's a good idea, at least in interactive mode. I think we should store the > expression in some global variable and print something like > > *** 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. > > Rainer > > > > >  > > Message: 6 > Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 02:18:39 +0200 (CEST) > From: Rainer Sch?pf <rainer.schoepf@...> > Subject: [Reducealgebradevelopers] Recent Updates to crack package > To: reducealgebradevelopers@... > MessageID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306290207060.1385@...> > ContentType: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=USASCII; 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? > > Rainer > > > >  > > Message: 7 > Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 11:28:15 +0200 (CEST) > From: Rainer Sch?pf <rainer.schoepf@...> > Subject: Re: [Reducealgebradevelopers] Recent Updates to crack > package > To: reducealgebradevelopers@... > MessageID: > <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306291126390.3352@...> > ContentType: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=USASCII > > Addendum: the test output for the crack package test file differs between the > CSL and PSL runs. A bad sign, I believe. > > Rainer > > > >  > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:59:35 +0000 > From: abpetrov <abpetrov@...> > Subject: [Reducealgebradevelopers] Rule f1(~x)+f1(~y)=> f(x+y) for > Reduce > To: reducealgebradevelopers@... > MessageID: <51FA3187.5040703@...> > ContentType: text/plain; charset="utf8" > > 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 > >  > > _______________________________________________ > Reducealgebradevelopers mailing list > Reducealgebradevelopers@... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/reducealgebradevelopers > > > End of Reducealgebradevelopers Digest, Vol 33, Issue 1 > ******************************************************** >  С уважением, Аксаныч Андрей, *89160706161, * aksanych@..., Skype: aksanych 
From: abpetrov <abpetrov@uf...>  20130801 04:34:08

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. 