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}
(106) 
_{Feb}
(36) 
_{Mar}
(65) 
_{Apr}
(63) 
_{May}
(95) 
_{Jun}
(56) 
_{Jul}
(48) 
_{Aug}
(55) 
_{Sep}
(100) 
_{Oct}
(57) 
_{Nov}
(33) 
_{Dec}
(46) 
2016 
_{Jan}
(76) 
_{Feb}
(53) 
_{Mar}
(88) 
_{Apr}
(79) 
_{May}
(62) 
_{Jun}
(65) 
_{Jul}
(37) 
_{Aug}
(23) 
_{Sep}
(108) 
_{Oct}
(68) 
_{Nov}
(66) 
_{Dec}
(47) 
2017 
_{Jan}
(55) 
_{Feb}
(11) 
_{Mar}
(30) 
_{Apr}
(19) 
_{May}
(14) 
_{Jun}
(21) 
_{Jul}
(30) 
_{Aug}
(38) 
_{Sep}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 


1
(1) 
2

3

4
(1) 
5
(4) 
6

7

8
(1) 
9
(1) 
10

11

12

13

14

15

16
(2) 
17
(1) 
18
(5) 
19

20

21

22

23

24
(1) 
25

26
(1) 
27
(2) 
28

29

30
(2) 




From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030930 18:25:03

Bugs item #814957, was opened at 20030930 04:17 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=814957&group_id=4933 Category: Xmaxima Group: Fix for 5.9.0 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: No internet => No xMaxima Initial Comment: The windows compiled version of xMaxima refuses to work if a connection to internet is not available and working. A message saying "Error starting Maxima: Could not open a socket" is issued. After that the window xMaxima keeps mute, no prompt, no echo, nothing... If we have no Internet connection how can we keep working with Maxima through the xMaxima interface?  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030930 14:25 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 An active Internet connection is not required by xMaxima. However, you must have sockets installed, working, and enabled, because Maxima uses them for interprocess communication. Firewall software may be closing off sockets, for example.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=814957&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030930 08:17:04

Bugs item #814957, was opened at 20030930 01:17 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=814957&group_id=4933 Category: Xmaxima Group: Fix for 5.9.0 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: No internet => No xMaxima Initial Comment: The windows compiled version of xMaxima refuses to work if a connection to internet is not available and working. A message saying "Error starting Maxima: Could not open a socket" is issued. After that the window xMaxima keeps mute, no prompt, no echo, nothing... If we have no Internet connection how can we keep working with Maxima through the xMaxima interface?  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=814957&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030927 18:02:02

Bugs item #813659, was opened at 20030927 14:01 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=813659&group_id=4933 Category: Lisp Core Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: xgraph broken (Windows) Initial Comment: xgraph_curves (using the bar graph example in the doc) puts up a second window, and it immediately closes. I suspect that xgraph is not supported on Windows, but if that is true, it should give a clean error, not just fail silently. Maxima 5.9.0 gcl 2.5.0 mingw32 W2k Athlon  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=813659&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030927 17:58:57

Bugs item #812968, was opened at 20030926 05:29 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=812968&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Joel Ray Holveck (piquan) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: is(equal(...)) says unknown, ratsimp says 0 Initial Comment: The way I understood EQUAL, it seems that it's supposed to answer true if ratsimp returns true. But in the following equation, it is clear that this is not happening. Sorry about the mess; this was the simplest reproduction scenario I could find. (C112) is(equal(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2)), (x1)/(2*x*sqrt(2)))); (D112) UNKNOWN (C113) is(equal(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2)), (x)/(2*x*sqrt(2))1/(2*x*sqrt(2)))); (D113) TRUE (C114) ratsimp(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2))  (x1)/(2*x*sqrt(2))); (D114) 0 (C115) facts(); (D115) [NOT EQUAL(x, 0)] I did consider that the problem may be related to the fact that ratsimp simplifies the two sides of the equation differently, so I tried putting them on the same side. In the following, the left side of the equal ratsimp's to 0 (as seen in D114), and yet equal doesn't assert that it's equal to 0. (C130) is(equal(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2))  (x1)/(2*x*sqrt(2)), 0)); (D130) UNKNOWN I may be missing something obvious here I'm just learning Maxima but this seems off to me.  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030927 13:58 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 You are absolutely right: this is a bug. Worse, is(equal(1/sqrt(2),sqrt(2)/2)) and even is(equal(1/sqrt (2)sqrt(2)/2,0)) return False! As you say, it should be using ratsimp(1/sqrt(2)sqrt(2)/2)  which does correctly return 0. It is also a known problem (bug?) that 1/sqrt(2) and sqrt(2)/2 do not simplify to the same thing, but as you say, even when you put them on the same side, it doesn't work.... 5.9.0 gcl 2.5.0 W2k  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=812968&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030926 09:29:04

Bugs item #812968, was opened at 20030926 02:29 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=812968&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Joel Ray Holveck (piquan) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: is(equal(...)) says unknown, ratsimp says 0 Initial Comment: The way I understood EQUAL, it seems that it's supposed to answer true if ratsimp returns true. But in the following equation, it is clear that this is not happening. Sorry about the mess; this was the simplest reproduction scenario I could find. (C112) is(equal(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2)), (x1)/(2*x*sqrt(2)))); (D112) UNKNOWN (C113) is(equal(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2)), (x)/(2*x*sqrt(2))1/(2*x*sqrt(2)))); (D113) TRUE (C114) ratsimp(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2))  (x1)/(2*x*sqrt(2))); (D114) 0 (C115) facts(); (D115) [NOT EQUAL(x, 0)] I did consider that the problem may be related to the fact that ratsimp simplifies the two sides of the equation differently, so I tried putting them on the same side. In the following, the left side of the equal ratsimp's to 0 (as seen in D114), and yet equal doesn't assert that it's equal to 0. (C130) is(equal(x/(2*x*sqrt(2))  1/(2*x*sqrt(2))  (x1)/(2*x*sqrt(2)), 0)); (D130) UNKNOWN I may be missing something obvious here I'm just learning Maxima but this seems off to me.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=812968&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030924 04:13:17

Bugs item #811522, was opened at 20030924 00:13 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=811522&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: redundant question in limit Initial Comment: limit(r^(b2)*(xr)^2,r,0) Is b  2 positive, negative, or zero? neg; Is x zero or nonzero? zero; Is b an integer? yes; Is 2  b an even number? no; Is 2  b an even number? <== redundant question no;  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=811522&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030918 18:24:26

Bugs item #808772, was opened at 20030918 14:24 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=808772&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: realpart returns expr with %I/FIX Initial Comment: realpart((%I*%E^%I%E^%I*%I)^a) returns the expression itself. This is correct in a sense  the expression has an imaginary part of zero  but the result of realpart should not contain a %I. Fix: In risplitexpt: ;;If all else fails, we use the trigonometric form. (cond ((and (=0 (cdr sp)) (=0 (cdr aa)) (freeof '$%i l)) ; NEW CLAUSE (cons l 0)) Unfortunately, this is not a complete solution. Consider (LOG(2)LOG(1))^a. This, too, has a real value, but contains nonreal subexpressions. The fix for that would be to remove the entire COND clause above. Though that is overkill, it is probably better than not removing it. Better Fix: remove that condclause completely.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=808772&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030918 16:33:02

Bugs item #803247, was opened at 20030909 11:51 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=803247&group_id=4933 Category: Lisp Core Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Camm Maguire (yycamm) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) >Summary: Infinite loop in Taylor(asin(sqrt(1x^2)/(1+eps))...)/workar Initial Comment: forwarded 198466 maxima@... tags 198466 +upstream tags 198466 +confirmed thanks A Debian user submitted this report, which I'm also registering at the website. Any ideas on a fix? Take care, ============================================================================= When trying to do some complicated Taylor series expansions, maxima hangs; I believe it is in an infinite loop, as xload shows the cpu saturated. An example is: f(x):= asin(sqrt(1x^2)/(1+eps)); taylor(f(x),x,0,2); which produces this condition. While trying to isolate the bug, I tried: g(x):=asin(sqrt(1x^2)); taylor(g(x),x,0,2); which produces the error message: "Taylor encountered an unfamiliar singularity in ABS(X)" I am unable to find any documentation on this "unfamiliar singularity" error message. However, from looking at the second derivative of G(x), I think I can see what's causing the problem: the sqrt() in the above expression is symmetrical about x=0, but has a cusp there. However, this ought to cause taylor() to produce an error message in the first example, instead of looping; this is not very userfriendly. What's the difference between a familiar singularity and an unfamiliar one, anyway? =============================================================================  Camm Maguire camm@... ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  Baha'u'llah  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030918 12:33 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 In the first problem, the bug appears to be in the default gcd; you can get around this by changing gcd routine: gcd:'spmod$ The second case is a bug in Taylor. To get around it, first expand the inner expression, then plug it into asin: inner: taylor(sqrt(1x^2)+err*x^6,x,0,6); taylor(asin(inner),x,0,5); In general, you have to be careful about the orders of expansion  you may need more terms in the inner expression than the whole expression. That is the sort of thing Taylor is supposed to do for you, but obviously there is a problem in this case. That is why I have added an explicit error term  to be able to trace it through. The second derivative business is, I believe, a red herring  the absolute value has to do with returning the principal value of sqrt, but the Taylor expansion doesn't care about principal values, it cares about analytic continuation.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=803247&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030918 16:13:23

Bugs item #808676, was opened at 20030918 12:13 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=808676&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: bfloat(1+10^30) rounds wrong with fpprec:20 Initial Comment: fpprec:20$ bfloat(1+10^30)  1; > 3.388...B21 The correct answer is 0.0b0, because bfloat(1+10^30) should round to exactly 1.0b0.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=808676&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030918 02:51:06

Bugs item #807275, was opened at 20030916 13:19 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=807275&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) >Summary: Taylor Illegal log kernel: log(cos(th)) @ %pi/2 Initial Comment: taylor(log(cos(th)),th,%pi/2,2) gives the internal error Illegal log kernel but taylor(log(sin(th)),th,0,2), which is equivalent, gives a perfectly reasonable result.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=807275&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030918 01:16:49

Bugs item #808280, was opened at 20030917 19:16 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=808280&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: describe(psi); claims Maxima can't evaluate psi Initial Comment: describe(psi); claims that Maxima can't evaluate the psi (the logarithmic derivative of gamma). Indeed psi[n](x); returns a simple expression involving zeta(n+1) for integer arguments x, and just psi[n](x) for other arguments. But there is another implementation of psi in the bffac module, so load(bffac); bpsi(n, x, precision); does yield numerical results for general arguments. It seems like the right thing to do is to have psi call bfpsi for arguments it can't evaluate. Another slightly less right thing is to change the description of psi to say that bfpsi in bffac can handle general arguments. For what it's worth, Robert Dodier  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=808280&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030917 23:19:45

Bugs item #696804, was opened at 20030303 14:52 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=696804&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: factor FAILS on polynomial !!! Initial Comment: Factor fails to factor a polynomial in two variables. p: (23*x^10*y^5 + 82*x^9*y^4 + 80*x^8*y^4  28*x^7*y^3  47*x^6*y^3  74*x^5*y^2 + 28*x^4*y^2  74*x^3*y + 25*x^2*y + 21*x  41) * (78*x^10*y^5 + 49*x^9*y^4 + 48*x^8*y^4 + 49*x^7*y^3 + 65*x^6*y^3  8*x^5*y^2 + 82*x^4*y^2  7*x^3*y  15*x^2*y  6*x + 30) factor(expand(p)) => irreducible If this is some intentional limitation, it should give some sort of warning. But I don't see why it should be. This was a polynomial generated randomly using: product(sum((random(200)100) * x^i * y^entier(i/2), i,0,10), j,1,2) Sometimes these polynomials factor correctly, but mostly they come back as irreducible. I tried setting Berlefact:false to see if that would make a difference, but that causes an internal error (POWERSET requires less than two arguments). I also tried using rat instead of expand to make sure it wasn't a multiplication problem rather than a factoring problem. Maxima version: 5.9.0 Maxima build date: 19:10 2/9/2003 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: Kyoto Common Lisp lispimplementationversion: GCL25.0  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030917 19:19 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Here is the smallest (degree and maximum product coefficient) case I've been able to find: (35*x*y^2+19*x^2+25) * (35*x*y^2+25*x^2+19) Found by a combination of randomized and systematic searching. The larger the coefficients, the denser the failure cases. Maxima 5.9.0 gcl 2.5.0 mingw32 W2k Athlon  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030916 09:28 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Another factor failure: (34*y^3+987*x*y23*x^31)*(234*x^23*y^45 978*x^43*y^10+1) Setting berlefact:false gives error: POWERSET [or a callee] requires less than two arguments.  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisb) Date: 20030304 16:16 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=570592 Macsyma 2.2 also fails to factor p after it has been expanded. Setting berlefact : false didn't make any difference. Barton  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=696804&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030916 17:19:16

Bugs item #807275, was opened at 20030916 13:19 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=807275&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Illegal log kernel: log(cos(th)) @ %pi/2 Initial Comment: taylor(log(cos(th)),th,%pi/2,2) gives the internal error Illegal log kernel but taylor(log(sin(th)),th,0,2), which is equivalent, gives a perfectly reasonable result.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=807275&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030916 13:28:11

Bugs item #696804, was opened at 20030303 14:52 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=696804&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: factor FAILS on polynomial !!! Initial Comment: Factor fails to factor a polynomial in two variables. p: (23*x^10*y^5 + 82*x^9*y^4 + 80*x^8*y^4  28*x^7*y^3  47*x^6*y^3  74*x^5*y^2 + 28*x^4*y^2  74*x^3*y + 25*x^2*y + 21*x  41) * (78*x^10*y^5 + 49*x^9*y^4 + 48*x^8*y^4 + 49*x^7*y^3 + 65*x^6*y^3  8*x^5*y^2 + 82*x^4*y^2  7*x^3*y  15*x^2*y  6*x + 30) factor(expand(p)) => irreducible If this is some intentional limitation, it should give some sort of warning. But I don't see why it should be. This was a polynomial generated randomly using: product(sum((random(200)100) * x^i * y^entier(i/2), i,0,10), j,1,2) Sometimes these polynomials factor correctly, but mostly they come back as irreducible. I tried setting Berlefact:false to see if that would make a difference, but that causes an internal error (POWERSET requires less than two arguments). I also tried using rat instead of expand to make sure it wasn't a multiplication problem rather than a factoring problem. Maxima version: 5.9.0 Maxima build date: 19:10 2/9/2003 host type: i686pcmingw32 lispimplementationtype: Kyoto Common Lisp lispimplementationversion: GCL25.0  >Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20030916 09:28 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Another factor failure: (34*y^3+987*x*y23*x^31)*(234*x^23*y^45 978*x^43*y^10+1) Setting berlefact:false gives error: POWERSET [or a callee] requires less than two arguments.  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisb) Date: 20030304 16:16 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=570592 Macsyma 2.2 also fails to factor p after it has been expanded. Setting berlefact : false didn't make any difference. Barton  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=696804&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030909 15:51:01

Bugs item #803247, was opened at 20030909 15:51 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=803247&group_id=4933 Category: Lisp Core Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Camm Maguire (yycamm) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: maxima: maxima hangs (infinite loop?) Initial Comment: forwarded 198466 maxima@... tags 198466 +upstream tags 198466 +confirmed thanks A Debian user submitted this report, which I'm also registering at the website. Any ideas on a fix? Take care, ============================================================================= When trying to do some complicated Taylor series expansions, maxima hangs; I believe it is in an infinite loop, as xload shows the cpu saturated. An example is: f(x):= asin(sqrt(1x^2)/(1+eps)); taylor(f(x),x,0,2); which produces this condition. While trying to isolate the bug, I tried: g(x):=asin(sqrt(1x^2)); taylor(g(x),x,0,2); which produces the error message: "Taylor encountered an unfamiliar singularity in ABS(X)" I am unable to find any documentation on this "unfamiliar singularity" error message. However, from looking at the second derivative of G(x), I think I can see what's causing the problem: the sqrt() in the above expression is symmetrical about x=0, but has a cusp there. However, this ought to cause taylor() to produce an error message in the first example, instead of looping; this is not very userfriendly. What's the difference between a familiar singularity and an unfamiliar one, anyway? =============================================================================  Camm Maguire camm@... ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  Baha'u'llah  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=803247&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030908 20:13:25

Bugs item #800532, was opened at 20030904 11:42 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=800532&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: plot2d(exp(x/(1+x)), [x, 10, 10]) doesn't work Initial Comment: Hi, in Maxima 5.9.0 (as packaged in the testing distribution of Debian) the following command does not work: plot2d(exp(x/(1+x)), [x, 10, 10]); Maxima takes 100% CPU time and appearantly stops working (until CtrlC is pressed). When using sin(x) instead of the exp(...) everything works fine.  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20030908 16:13 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=28849 This is mostly fixed in CVS using the adaptive plotting stuff. The plot, though, looks like a single vertical line due to a division by zero at x = 1.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=800532&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030905 17:46:27

Bugs item #801231, was opened at 20030905 11:59 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by willisb You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801231&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: MAX(a+b,c) is NOT equal to MAX(c,a+b) Initial Comment: (C1) assume(a+b>c)$ (C2) MAX(a+b,c); MAX(c,a+b); (D2) b + a (C3) (D3) MAX(c, b + a) #why it is not simplified ? (C4) is(MAX(a+b,c)=MAX(c,a+b)); (D4) FALSE #why FALSE if must be TRUE ? P.S. Appreciate if you exclude javascripts from the site. Alexander VIDYBIDA vidybida@...  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisb) Date: 20030905 12:46 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=570592 Most likely, this bug is related to the bug (C1) assume(a+b > c); (D1) [ C + b + a > 0] (C2) sign(a+bc); (D2) POS (C3) sign(c(a+b)); (D3) PNZ The result of PNZ (positive, negative, or zero) isn't wrong; however, Maxima should be able to determine that c  (a + b) < 0. That is (d3) should be NEG instead of PNZ. Barton  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20030905 12:08 Message: Logged In: NO Comment by A lexander VIDYBIDA vidybida@... Maxima version: 5.9.0 Maxima build date: 19:1 8/5/2003 host type: i586pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: CLISP lispimplementationversion: 2.27 (released 20010717) (built 3223390905) (memory 3269088151)  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801231&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030905 17:13:39

Bugs item #801244, was opened at 20030905 10:13 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801244&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: MAX(a+b,c) is NOT equal to MAX(c,a+b) Initial Comment:  Maxima version: 5.9.0 Maxima build date: 19:1 8/5/2003 host type: i586pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: CLISP lispimplementationversion: 2.27 (released 20010717) (built 3223390905) (memory 3269088151)  (C1) assume(a+b>c)$ (C2) MAX(a+b,c); MAX(c,a+b); (D2) b + a (C3) (D3) MAX(c, b + a) #why it is not simplified ? (C4) is(MAX(a+b,c)=MAX(c,a+b)); (D4) FALSE #why FALSE if must be TRUE ? P.S. Appreciate if you exclude javascripts from the site. Alexander VIDYBIDA vidybida@...  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801244&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030905 17:08:08

Bugs item #801231, was opened at 20030905 09:59 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801231&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: MAX(a+b,c) is NOT equal to MAX(c,a+b) Initial Comment: (C1) assume(a+b>c)$ (C2) MAX(a+b,c); MAX(c,a+b); (D2) b + a (C3) (D3) MAX(c, b + a) #why it is not simplified ? (C4) is(MAX(a+b,c)=MAX(c,a+b)); (D4) FALSE #why FALSE if must be TRUE ? P.S. Appreciate if you exclude javascripts from the site. Alexander VIDYBIDA vidybida@...  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20030905 10:08 Message: Logged In: NO Comment by A lexander VIDYBIDA vidybida@... Maxima version: 5.9.0 Maxima build date: 19:1 8/5/2003 host type: i586pclinuxgnu lispimplementationtype: CLISP lispimplementationversion: 2.27 (released 20010717) (built 3223390905) (memory 3269088151)  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801231&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030905 16:59:29

Bugs item #801231, was opened at 20030905 09:59 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801231&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: MAX(a+b,c) is NOT equal to MAX(c,a+b) Initial Comment: (C1) assume(a+b>c)$ (C2) MAX(a+b,c); MAX(c,a+b); (D2) b + a (C3) (D3) MAX(c, b + a) #why it is not simplified ? (C4) is(MAX(a+b,c)=MAX(c,a+b)); (D4) FALSE #why FALSE if must be TRUE ? P.S. Appreciate if you exclude javascripts from the site. Alexander VIDYBIDA vidybida@...  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=801231&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030904 15:42:22

Bugs item #800532, was opened at 20030904 08:42 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=800532&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: plot2d(exp(x/(1+x)), [x, 10, 10]) doesn't work Initial Comment: Hi, in Maxima 5.9.0 (as packaged in the testing distribution of Debian) the following command does not work: plot2d(exp(x/(1+x)), [x, 10, 10]); Maxima takes 100% CPU time and appearantly stops working (until CtrlC is pressed). When using sin(x) instead of the exp(...) everything works fine.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=800532&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20030901 14:10:35

Bugs item #798571, was opened at 20030901 09:10 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=798571&group_id=4933 Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisb) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: sign(sqrt(2)/2  1/sqrt(2)) > zero, pos, neg, or pnz Initial Comment: Depending on the values of fpprec and signbfloat, sign(sqrt(2)/2  1/sqrt(2)) evaluates to zero, pos, neg, or pnz. (C1) display2d : false; (D1) FALSE (C2) a : sqrt(2)/2  1/sqrt(2); (D2) SQRT(2)/21/SQRT(2) (C3) for k : 20 thru 25 do (fpprec : k, print(k,sign(a))); 20 ZERO 21 POS 22 ZERO 23 POS 24 ZERO 25 NEG (D3) DONE (C4) sign(a), signbfloat : true; (D4) NEG (C5) sign(a), signbfloat : false; (D5) PNZ Here is another example  this time sign(p) should evaluate to pos. (C7) p : exp(x)  sum(x^k/k!,k,0,15)$ (C8) p : subst(1/10000001,x,p)$ (C9) sign(p),signbfloat : true; (D9) ZERO (C10) sign(p),signbfloat : false; (D10) PNZ (C11) for k : 20 thru 25 do (fpprec : k, print(k,sign (p))); 20 POS 21 NEG 22 NEG 23 ZERO 24 POS 25 ZERO (D11) DONE (C12) Additionally, signbfloat isn't documented (C17) describe("signbfloat"); (D17) FALSE Barton  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=798571&group_id=4933 