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}
(21) 
_{Apr}

_{May}

_{Jun}

_{Jul}

_{Aug}

_{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...>  20100604 23:46:20

Bugs item #2998923, was opened at 20100509 15:18 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2998923&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: Pending >Resolution: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: partfrac doesn't work correct with keepfloat:true; Initial Comment: Kind of annoying artifact. partfrac() works perfect with CRE, but only partly with FLOAT  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100605 01:46 Message: I think it might be a missing feature that partfrac does not work with keepfloat:true. But it is possible to get a floating point approximation with the function float: (%o1) 7/((0.65*s+1)*s*(1.6*s+1)) (%i2) float(partfrac(expr,s)); rat: replaced 0.65 by 13/20 = 0.65 rat: replaced 1.6 by 8/5 = 1.6 (%o2) 62.26315789473684/(13.0*s+20.0)94.3157894736842/(8.0*s+5.0)+7.0/s Furthermore, the documentation of partfrac seems to be placed in the wrong chapter "Number Theory". It might be better to put the documentation into the chapter "Polynomials". Setting the status to pending and the resolution to "works for me". Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2998923&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 23:16:30

Bugs item #2723549, was opened at 20090331 18:15 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2723549&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: None Group: None >Status: Pending >Resolution: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Martin (mhs) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: diff display error for nonint. order and derivabbrev: true Initial Comment: for noninteger order of the derivative, diff can't display anything when derivabbrev: true, see example below. (%i1) derivabbrev: false; (%o1) false (%i2) this:diff(f(x), x, n); (%o2) 'diff(f(x),x,n) (%i3) derivabbrev: true; (%o3) true (%i4) this; Maxima encountered a Lisp error: Error in > [or a callee]: $N is not of type (OR RATIONAL LISP:FLOAT). Automatically continuing. To reenable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil.  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100605 01:16 Message: With the current CVS version of Maxima I can not reproduce the reported problem: Maxima version: 5.20post Maxima build date: 21:58 6/4/2010 Host type: i686pclinuxgnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.29.11.debian (%i1) derivabbrev:false$ (%i2) this:diff(f(x),x,n); (%o2) 'diff(f(x),x,n) (%i3) derivabbrev:true$ (%i4) this; (%o4) 'diff(f(x),x,n) Perhaps, it is a problem with an earlier version of Maxima. We have no build_info for this bug report. Setting the status to pending and the resolution to "works for me". Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=2723549&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 21:12:11

Bugs item #1929287, was opened at 20080330 13:34 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1929287&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: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 4 Private: No Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: 0.0 + [0] > [0] Initial Comment: OK: (%i1) 0.0 + 0; (%o1) 0.0 Not OK; (%o2) should be [0.0], not [0] (%i2) 0.0 + [0]; (%o2) [0] Also, 0.0b0 + [0] > [0]. Matrix addition has the same bug: (%i6) 0.0 + matrix([0,0]); (%o6) matrix([0,0])  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100604 23:12 Message: Fixed in simp.lisp revison 1.111. We get (%i2) 0.0+[0]; (%o2) [0.0] (%i3) 0.0+matrix([0,0]); (%o3) matrix([0.0,0.0]) Closing this bug report as fixed. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20080419 18:32 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: NO I'm guessing that the behavior 0.0 + [0] => [0] comes from the same place as 0.0 + foo => foo, 0.0 + foo(x) => foo(x). Maybe we should disallow the simplification (inexact zero) + (whatever) => (whatever). Not sure what we should do at this point.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1929287&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 19:42:37

Bugs item #3010525, was opened at 20100602 16:58 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3010525&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: Documentation Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Creidieki M. Crouch (creidieki) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: abs documentation doesn't explain mapping behavior Initial Comment: The documentation for the abs(expr) function doesn't mention that it maps over structures. (In my testing, it seems to map over lists but not matrices?).  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100604 21:42 Message: As suggested the abs function has been implemented to have the property distribute_over in simp.lisp 1.110. Furthermore, the documentation has been updated in Operators.texi 1.59 and Simplification.texi 1.26. These are the properties of the abs function: (%i2) properties(abs); (%o2) [integral,rule,"distributes over bags",noun,gradef,"system function"] The properties NOUN and DISTRIBUTE OVER BAGS are new. Closing this bug report as fixed. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100604 19:14 Message: I had a look at the implementation of the abs function. I think we should cut out the mapping over bags from the simplifying function simpabs and put the property distribute_over on the property list. In general, we have the possibility to look up the properties of a function with the Maxima command properties. For the abs function we get (%i8) properties(abs); (%o8) [rule, gradef] This is an example for the Bessel J function. We get much more information: (%i9) properties(bessel_j); (%o9) [conjugate function, complex characteristic, limit function, integral, gradef, distributes over bags, rule, noun, transfun] Some time ago we extended the function properties to show more correct the properties. We can even extend it and we should document the function properties better. By the way: I have detected that we support the symbol %mabs. This is a workaround to get the correct simplification of a noun form like 'abs(1). But this is not necessary. The underlying problem is that the properties noun, verb, alias and reversealiase are not implemented correctly for the abs function. When we correct this we no longer need to support the symbol '%mabs. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20100603 07:15 Message: abs automatically maps over lists, matrices, and equations. (%i81) abs ([1, 2]); (%o81) [1, 2] (%i82) abs (matrix ([1, 2])); (%o82) [ 1 2 ] (%i83) abs (1 = 2); (%o83) 1 = 2 There isn't any way to discover that short of reading the source code (which is how I figured it out). That's a bug in the documentation, as pointed out by the original poster. Aside from the documentation, there ought to be a way to easily discover the algebraic properties of functions. This mappingoverobjects is hardwired in the code, it's not a declared property. It's not a bug since it works OK but still it would be better to have discoverable properties.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3010525&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 18:46:42

Bugs item #1852344, was opened at 20071217 15:52 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1852344&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 Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: sort(rat(...)) internal error Initial Comment: sort(rat([x=1,y=1])) => fatal error Maxima 5.13.0 GCL 2.6.8 Windows XP  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100604 20:46 Message: This bug has been fixed some times ago in simp.lisp revision 1.106. We get the results: (%i1) sort(rat([x=1,y=1])); (%o1) [x = 1,y = 1] (%i2) orderlessp(rat(a=1),rat(b=1)); (%o2) true Closing this bug report as fixed. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20080615 03:34 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: NO I take it back. orderlessp(rat(a=1),rat(b=1)) => error after all.  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20080615 03:26 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=501686 Originator: NO Maxima 5.14.99rc1: sort(rat([x=1, y=1])) => error orderlessp(rat(a=1),rat(b=1)) => true (not an error as observed before)  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20071218 19:29 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=895922 Originator: NO Changing ratdisrep to $totaldisrep in $sort makes this bug go away. But I don't know if this is the right thing to do. (defmfun $sort (l &optional (f 'lessthan)) (let ((llist l) comparfun bfun) (unless ($listp llist) (merror "The first argument to `sort' must be a list:~%~M" llist)) (setq llist (copylist (cdr llist)) comparfun (mfunction1 (setq bfun (getopr f)))) (when (member bfun '(lessthan great) :test #'eq) (setq llist (mapcar #'$totaldisrep llist))) (cons '(mlist simp) (sort llist comparfun))))  Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Date: 20071218 16:07 Message: Logged In: NO Re: e: rat(x=1)$ ratp(e) => false; ratp(lhs(e)) => true This is as designed (though it may be surprising that ratp(rat(...)) isn't always true. After all, there is no way to represent relational operators in CRE form. > ratdisrep doesn't convert the left and right sides of e to general form. This is normal. ratdisrep only disreps the top level. You need totaldisrep to disrep all the way down. You get the same thing with rat([x,y]). Which brings up another bug...: rat([(x^21)/(x1)]) => [x1] but rat({(x^21)/(x1)}) => {(x^21)/(x1)} This is precisely *because* ratp(rat({x})) = true! (%i54) rat([(x^21)/(x1)]); Evaluation took 0.00 seconds (0.00 elapsed) (%o54)/R/ [x + 1]  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20071218 13:32 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=895922 Originator: NO I think there is a bug / weirdness with the way rat interacts with = expressions. (%i1) e : rat(x=1)$ We have ratp(e) > false and ratp(first(e)) > true. (%i2) ratp(e); (%o2) false (%i3) ratp(first(e)); (%o3) true Also, ratdisrep doesn't convert the left and right sides of e to general form. (%i4) e : ratdisrep(e)$ (%i5) ratp(first(e)); (%o5) true  Comment By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Date: 20071217 20:10 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=588346 Originator: YES This appears to come from orderlessp(rat(a=1),rat(b=1)) => fatal error  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=1852344&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 17:14:54

Bugs item #3010525, was opened at 20100602 16:58 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3010525&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: Documentation Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Creidieki M. Crouch (creidieki) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: abs documentation doesn't explain mapping behavior Initial Comment: The documentation for the abs(expr) function doesn't mention that it maps over structures. (In my testing, it seems to map over lists but not matrices?).  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100604 19:14 Message: I had a look at the implementation of the abs function. I think we should cut out the mapping over bags from the simplifying function simpabs and put the property distribute_over on the property list. In general, we have the possibility to look up the properties of a function with the Maxima command properties. For the abs function we get (%i8) properties(abs); (%o8) [rule, gradef] This is an example for the Bessel J function. We get much more information: (%i9) properties(bessel_j); (%o9) [conjugate function, complex characteristic, limit function, integral, gradef, distributes over bags, rule, noun, transfun] Some time ago we extended the function properties to show more correct the properties. We can even extend it and we should document the function properties better. By the way: I have detected that we support the symbol %mabs. This is a workaround to get the correct simplification of a noun form like 'abs(1). But this is not necessary. The underlying problem is that the properties noun, verb, alias and reversealiase are not implemented correctly for the abs function. When we correct this we no longer need to support the symbol '%mabs. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20100603 07:15 Message: abs automatically maps over lists, matrices, and equations. (%i81) abs ([1, 2]); (%o81) [1, 2] (%i82) abs (matrix ([1, 2])); (%o82) [ 1 2 ] (%i83) abs (1 = 2); (%o83) 1 = 2 There isn't any way to discover that short of reading the source code (which is how I figured it out). That's a bug in the documentation, as pointed out by the original poster. Aside from the documentation, there ought to be a way to easily discover the algebraic properties of functions. This mappingoverobjects is hardwired in the code, it's not a declared property. It's not a bug since it works OK but still it would be better to have discoverable properties.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3010525&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 11:03:17

Bugs item #3011321, was opened at 20100604 04:00 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&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  Differential eqns Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: diff(log(log(x^2)),x); return incorrect value Initial Comment: hello folks before i begin , let me say that i am not a native english speaker so i am going to do my best i discoveved a bug checking a results of a test yersterday in evaluatting the follow statemen [output] (%i1) diff(log(log(x^2)),x); 1 (%o1)  x log(x) (%i2) [/output] the result of such expression should be 2/(x*(log(x)))  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20100604 13:03 Message: Closing this bug report. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Date: 20100604 05:42 Message: sorry about that i read wrong , please close this bug, and sorry  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100604 04:58 Message: log(log(x^2)) = log(2*log(x)) = log(2)+log(log(x)). (Assuming real x > 0). The derivative of log(log(x)) is 1/(x*log(x)). Or perhaps you were expecting maxima to return 2/(x*log(x^2)), which is equivalent to 1/(x*log(x)). Marking as pending/invalid.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 05:46:32

Bugs item #3000108, was opened at 20100511 12:26 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by robert_dodier You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3000108&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: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: uhlst (uhlst) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Inconsistency of 1x1matrices Initial Comment: I'm not quite sure whether this is a bug or not, but defining two 1x1 matrices and multiplying them with "." returns a scalar and not a matrix. Multiplying them both by "*" gives a matrix. It should in this case either give also a scalar or an error. So the question is, whether Maxima should automatically switch from 1x1 matrices to scalars and back. I think returning a scalar for the "." is ok if the same happens for "*". (%i7) kill(all); (%o0) done (%i1) a: matrix([1]);b: matrix([2]); (%o1) [ 1 ] (%o2) [ 2 ] (%i3) a.b; (%o3) 2 (%i4) a*b; (%o4) [ 2 ] (%i5) c: 2; (%o5) 2 (%i6) c.a; (%o6) [ 2 ] (%i7) c*a; (%o7) [ 2 ]  >Comment By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Date: 20100603 23:46 Message: As I don't see a bug reported here, I'm closing this report. To uhlst: general questions about how to use Maxima should probably be posted to the Maxima mailing list. See: http://maxima.sourceforge.net/maximalist.html  Comment By: uhlst (uhlst) Date: 20100514 00:03 Message: I think, setting doallmxops : false and domxmxops : false will prevent Maxima from carrying out the calculation and it returns a "noun" form. In my opinion, Maxima should give an error as the number of rows of b are less then the number of columns of A in my example. But Maxima seems to have an inherent conversion function which transforms the row vector into a column vector.  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20100513 14:27 Message: I think setting doallmxops : false and domxmxops : false will do what you want. Maxima's dot operation is controlled by many sometimes confusing switches. But it's all documented (try ?domxmxops) (%i2) (A: matrix([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]),b:matrix([10,11,12])); (%o2) matrix([10,11,12]) (%i18) A .b,doallmxops : false, domxmxops : false; (%o18) matrix([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]) . matrix([10,11,12])  Comment By: uhlst (uhlst) Date: 20100513 12:29 Message: thank you for pointing me to scalarmatrixp. I was not aware of this option in Maxima. However, I still struggle with the automatic conversion of a row vector to a column vector. Is there also a option to switch this behaviour of? (%i1) display2d: false;A: matrix([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]);b: matrix([10,11,12]); (%o1) false (%o2) matrix([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]) (%o3) matrix([10,11,12]) (%i4) A.b; (%o4) matrix([68],[167],[266])  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20100512 03:49 Message: Maybe you would like to set scalarmatrixp to false: (%i4) matrix([a]) . matrix([b]), scalarmatrixp : false; (%o4) matrix([a*b]) (%i5) matrixp(%); (%o5) true (%i6) matrix([a]) . matrix([b]), scalarmatrixp : true; (%o6) a*b  Comment By: uhlst (uhlst) Date: 20100511 23:52 Message: here again the commands with display2d: false (%i2) display2d: false; (%o2) false (%i3) kill(all); (%o0) done (%i1) a: matrix([1],[2],[3]); (%o1) matrix([1],[2],[3]) (%i2) B: matrix([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]); (%o2) matrix([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]) (%i3) a.B; MULTIPLYMATRICES: attempt to multiply nonconformable matrices.  an error. To debug this try: debugmode(true); (%i4) B.(transpose(a)); (%o4) matrix([14],[32],[50]) (%i5) B.transpose(a); (%o5) matrix([14],[32],[50]) (%i6) B.a; (%o6) matrix([14],[32],[50])  Comment By: uhlst (uhlst) Date: 20100511 23:48 Message: perhaps related is the following "automatic" conversion that maxima does (%i15) kill(all); (%o0) done (%i1) a: matrix([1],[2],[3]); [ 1 ] [ ] (%o1) [ 2 ] [ ] [ 3 ] (%i2) B: matrix([1,2,3],[4,5,6],[7,8,9]); [ 1 2 3 ] [ ] (%o2) [ 4 5 6 ] [ ] [ 7 8 9 ] (%i3) a.B; MULTIPLYMATRICES: attempt to multiply nonconformable matrices.  an error. To debug this try: debugmode(true); (%i4) B.a; [ 14 ] [ ] (%o4) [ 32 ] [ ] [ 50 ] (%i5) B.(transpose(a)); [ 14 ] [ ] (%o5) [ 32 ] [ ] [ 50 ] (%i6) B.transpose(a); [ 14 ] [ ] (%o6) [ 32 ] [ ] [ 50 ] so multiplying a column vector with a square matrix from the left does not work but multiplying a matrix with a row vector from the left works.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3000108&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 03:42:21

Bugs item #3011321, was opened at 20100604 02:00 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&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  Differential eqns Group: None >Status: Open Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: diff(log(log(x^2)),x); return incorrect value Initial Comment: hello folks before i begin , let me say that i am not a native english speaker so i am going to do my best i discoveved a bug checking a results of a test yersterday in evaluatting the follow statemen [output] (%i1) diff(log(log(x^2)),x); 1 (%o1)  x log(x) (%i2) [/output] the result of such expression should be 2/(x*(log(x)))  >Comment By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Date: 20100604 03:42 Message: sorry about that i read wrong , please close this bug, and sorry  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100604 02:58 Message: log(log(x^2)) = log(2*log(x)) = log(2)+log(log(x)). (Assuming real x > 0). The derivative of log(log(x)) is 1/(x*log(x)). Or perhaps you were expecting maxima to return 2/(x*log(x^2)), which is equivalent to 1/(x*log(x)). Marking as pending/invalid.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 02:58:08

Bugs item #3011321, was opened at 20100603 22:00 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&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  Differential eqns Group: None >Status: Pending >Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: diff(log(log(x^2)),x); return incorrect value Initial Comment: hello folks before i begin , let me say that i am not a native english speaker so i am going to do my best i discoveved a bug checking a results of a test yersterday in evaluatting the follow statemen [output] (%i1) diff(log(log(x^2)),x); 1 (%o1)  x log(x) (%i2) [/output] the result of such expression should be 2/(x*(log(x)))  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100603 22:58 Message: log(log(x^2)) = log(2*log(x)) = log(2)+log(log(x)). (Assuming real x > 0). The derivative of log(log(x)) is 1/(x*log(x)). Or perhaps you were expecting maxima to return 2/(x*log(x^2)), which is equivalent to 1/(x*log(x)). Marking as pending/invalid.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 02:53:47

Bugs item #3010829, was opened at 20100603 00:50 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by rtoy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3010829&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: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Robert Dodier (robert_dodier) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: numerical evaluation of elliptic_ec fails for argument > 1 Initial Comment: (%i60) elliptic_ec (1.7); The assertion (AND (>= X 0) (>= Y 0) (>= Z 0) (PLUSP (+ X Y)) (PLUSP (+ X Z)) (PLUSP (+ Y Z))) failed. which appears to originate in the function DRF. Not sure what is the right answer here, but at any rate it shouldn't be a Lisp error.  >Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100603 22:53 Message: Fixed in ellipt.lisp, rev 1.73.  Comment By: Raymond Toy (rtoy) Date: 20100603 18:27 Message: Agreed. Curiously, elliptic_ec(1.7b0) returns a complex number, which appears to be correct. The issue is that the algorithm for floats assumes that m <= 1, but the bfloat algorithm is correct for all values of m. This will be fixed shortly.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3010829&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20100604 02:00:37

Bugs item #3011321, was opened at 20100604 02:00 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&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  Differential eqns Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: diff(log(log(x^2)),x); return incorrect value Initial Comment: hello folks before i begin , let me say that i am not a native english speaker so i am going to do my best i discoveved a bug checking a results of a test yersterday in evaluatting the follow statemen [output] (%i1) diff(log(log(x^2)),x); 1 (%o1)  x log(x) (%i2) [/output] the result of such expression should be 2/(x*(log(x)))  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3011321&group_id=4933 