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}
(10) 
_{Sep}

_{Oct}

_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 





1
(3) 
2
(1) 
3
(3) 
4

5
(1) 
6
(1) 
7

8
(2) 
9
(5) 
10
(2) 
11
(4) 
12
(7) 
13
(1) 
14

15

16
(5) 
17
(4) 
18
(3) 
19
(3) 
20
(2) 
21
(2) 
22

23
(1) 
24

25
(3) 
26
(6) 
27
(7) 
28
(3) 
29
(16) 
30
(4) 

From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100401 18:16:54

Bugs item #2980662, was opened at 20100401 19:47 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by uhlst You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2980662&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  Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Incorrect calculation using 3.14 Initial Comment: One of the basic calculations is highly problematic: Input: a:3.14; b:1; Result a+b: 4.140000000000001 Error occurs only in the context of the number 3.14. (Maxima version: 5.20.1, Maxima build date: 15:50 2/19/2010.)  Comment By: uhlst (uhlst) Date: 20100401 20:16 Message: Using Maxima 5.20.1 with CLISP 2.44.1 I obtain the following results which I think are correct (%i1) a:3.14; (%o1) 3.14 (%i2) b:1; (%o2) 1 (%i3) a+b; (%o3) 4.14 (%i4) a+b4.14; (%o4) 8.881784197001252E16 the error is in the range of the machine precision eps. See also the following octave session which gives the same result octave:1> 3.14 + 1 ans = 4.1400 octave:2> format long octave:3> 3.14 + 1 ans = 4.14000000000000 octave:4> 3.14 + 1  4.14 ans = 8.88178419700125e16 octave:5> eps ans = 2.22044604925031e16 I think you get the 4.140...01 because of the rounding of 8.88e16 to 1e15 which is displayed  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2980662&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100401 17:47:49

Bugs item #2980662, was opened at 20100401 17:47 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by nobody You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2980662&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  Floating point Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Incorrect calculation using 3.14 Initial Comment: One of the basic calculations is highly problematic: Input: a:3.14; b:1; Result a+b: 4.140000000000001 Error occurs only in the context of the number 3.14. (Maxima version: 5.20.1, Maxima build date: 15:50 2/19/2010.)  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2980662&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100401 13:31:12

Bugs item #2980551, was opened at 20100401 15:31 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2980551&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  Simplification Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Inconsistent simplification of exp(x*%i*%pi) Initial Comment: Some simplifications of %especial are problematic, e.g. exp((2+x)^2*%pi*%i) > %e^(%i*%pi*(x+2)^24*%i*%pi) exp((2+x)^10*%pi*%i) > %e^(%i*%pi*(x+2)^101024*%i*%pi) The handling of expressions is inconsistent, e.g. the following is simplified exp((2+x)*%i*%pi) > exp(%i*%pi*x) but not the expanded form exp(2*%i*%pi%+%i*%pi*x) > e^(%i*%pi*x+2*%i*%pi) Furthermore, we have inconsistent simplifications of expressions which contain float or bigfloat values. The following shows some examples of a testfile to check the simplification of expressions like exp(x*%pi*%) and the desired results: ********************** Problem 5 *************** Input: exp(2*%i*%pi) Result: 1 ... Which was correct. ********************** Problem 6 *************** Input: exp((x+2)*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(%i*%pi*x) ... Which was correct. ********************** Problem 7 *************** Input: exp(x*%i*%pi+2*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(%i*%pi*x+2*%i*%pi) This differed from the expected result: exp(x*%i*%pi) ********************** Problem 8 *************** Input: log(exp((x+2)^2*%i*%pi)) Result: %i*%pi*(x+2)^24*%i*%pi This differed from the expected result: (x+2)^2*%i*%pi ********************** Problem 9 *************** Input: exp(2.0*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(2.0*%i*%pi) This differed from the expected result: 1.0 ********************** Problem 10 *************** Input: exp((x+2.0)*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(%i*%pi*x) This differed from the expected result: exp(1.0*x*%i*%pi) ********************** Problem 11 *************** Input: exp(x*%i*%pi+2.0*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(%i*%pi*x+2.0*%i*%pi) This differed from the expected result: exp(1.0*x*%i*%pi) ********************** Problem 12 *************** Input: log(exp((x+2.0)^2*%i*%pi)) Result: %i*%pi*(x+2.0)^24*%i*%pi This differed from the expected result: (x+2.0)^2*%i*%pi ********************** Problem 13 *************** Input: exp(2.0b0*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(2.0b0*%i*%pi) This differed from the expected result: 1.0b0 ********************** Problem 14 *************** Input: exp((x+2.0b0)*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(%i*%pi*x) This differed from the expected result: exp(1.0b0*x*%i*%pi) ********************** Problem 15 *************** Input: exp(x*%i*%pi+2.0b0*%i*%pi) Result: %e^(%i*%pi*x+2.0b0*%i*%pi) This differed from the expected result: exp(1.0b0*x*%i*%pi) ********************** Problem 16 *************** Input: log(exp((x+2.0b0)^2*%i*%pi)) Result: %i*%pi*(x+2.0b0)^24*%i*%pi This differed from the expected result: (x+2.0b0)^2*%i*%pi ********************** Problem 17 *************** Input: exp(3*%pi*%i/2) Result: %i ... Which was correct. ********************** Problem 18 *************** Input: exp(1.5*%pi*%i) Result: %e^(1.5*%i*%pi) This differed from the expected result: 1.0*%i ********************** Problem 19 *************** Input: exp(1.5b0*%pi*%i) Result: %e^(1.5b0*%i*%pi) This differed from the expected result: 1.0b0*%i ********************** Problem 20 *************** Input: exp((x+3/2)*%pi*%i) Result: %i*%e^(%i*%pi*x) ... Which was correct. ********************** Problem 21 *************** Input: exp((x+1.5)*%pi*%i) Result: %i*%e^(%i*%pi*x) This differed from the expected result: %i*exp(1.0*%i*%pi*x) ********************** Problem 22 *************** Input: exp((x+1.5b0)*%pi*%i) Result: %i*%e^(%i*%pi*x) This differed from the expected result: %i*exp(1.0b0*%i*%pi*x) Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2980551&group_id=4933 