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}
(54) 
_{Nov}

_{Dec}

S  M  T  W  T  F  S 



1
(1) 
2
(1) 
3
(2) 
4
(2) 
5
(2) 
6
(1) 
7
(1) 
8
(2) 
9
(1) 
10

11

12
(9) 
13
(1) 
14
(3) 
15
(4) 
16
(2) 
17
(5) 
18

19

20

21
(1) 
22

23
(3) 
24
(5) 
25

26
(3) 
27

28

29
(2) 
30
(1) 
31



From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110315 14:49:39

Bugs item #3213380, was opened at 20110315 10:49 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by macrakis You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3213380&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 3 Private: No Submitted By: Stavros Macrakis (macrakis) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: ""(a,b) with simp:false prints incorrectly Initial Comment: With simp:true, ""(a,b)  internally, ((mminus) a b)  correctly simplifies to ab. But with simp:false, ""(a,b) prints as a, not as ab. s PS There are still some traces of the former nary mdifference operator in the code, but it is no longer supported.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3213380&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110314 20:38:03

Bugs item #3211975, was opened at 20110314 20:38 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3211975&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Integral shouldn't be zero, but Maxima says it is Initial Comment: The following behavior leads to some weird results. In particular, if one plots cos(w+T)/(1+e*cos(T))^2 for various 0<e<1 and various w, it becomes clear that the answer shouldn't be zero. This is also tracked at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8728 Maxima 5.23.2 http://maxima.sourceforge.net using Lisp SBCL 1.0.24 Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING. Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter. The function bug_report() provides bug reporting information. (%i1) assume(1e^2>0); 2 (%o1) [e < 1] (%i3) integrate(cos(w+T)/(1+e*cos(T))^2,T,0,2*%pi); (%o3) 0 (%i4) integrate(cos(w+T)/(1+.5*cos(T))^2,T,0,2*%pi); rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.0625 by 1/16 = 0.0625 (%o4) 0 (%i5) integrate(cos(.5+T)/(1+.25*cos(T))^2,T,0,2*%pi); rat: replaced 0.25 by 1/4 = 0.25 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.25 by 1/4 = 0.25 rat: replaced 0.25 by 1/4 = 0.25 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 rat: replaced 0.25 by 1/4 = 0.25 rat: replaced 0.25 by 1/4 = 0.25 rat: replaced 0.015625 by 1/64 = 0.015625 rat: replaced 0.5 by 1/2 = 0.5 (%o5) 0 (%i6) keepfloat:True; (%o6) True (%i7) integrate(cos(.5+T)/(1+.25*cos(T))^2,T,0,2*%pi); Maxima encountered a Lisp error: The value 0.0625 is not of type FIXNUM. Automatically continuing. To enable the Lisp debugger set *debuggerhook* to nil.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3211975&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110314 19:53:46

Bugs item #3211915, was opened at 20110314 19:53 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3211915&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integration of abs(sin(x)) wrong Initial Comment: This definite integral should be 4. Maxima 5.23.2 http://maxima.sourceforge.net using Lisp SBCL 1.0.24 Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING. Dedicated to the memory of William Schelter. The function bug_report() provides bug reporting information. (%i1) integrate(abs(sin(x)),x,0,2*%pi); (%o1) 0 One knows this because the following answer is correct, and the multiply by 4: (%i2) integrate(sin(x),x,0,%pi/2); (%o2) 1 See first report at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10914  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3211915&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110314 17:39:31

Bugs item #3211734, was opened at 20110314 13:39 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by zaleksf You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3211734&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: Problem not in Maxima Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Steven Zalek (zaleksf) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: wxMaxima load lapack fails Initial Comment: load(lapack) command works in command line maxima and XMaxima (version 5.23.2)  it takes about 5 seconds to complete on my laptop. But this command 'hangs' or fails in wxMaxima: the app does not 'lockup', but no further entries are possible. This bug is similar to previous entry that was closed.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3211734&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110313 11:07:32

Bugs item #3199638, was opened at 20110304 16:07 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by ssllvv You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199638&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: dstanislav (ssllvv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integrate_sqrt_of_trig Initial Comment: (%i1) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); (%o1)  1 ( right answer: 1 ) (%i2) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); Is tan(x) positive or negative?p; (%o2)  1 ( right answer: 1 )  Maxima version: 5.23.2 Maxima build date: 17:9 1/17/2011 Host type: i686pcmingw32 Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8   >Comment By: dstanislav (ssllvv) Date: 20110313 13:07 Message: Unfortunately, option radexpand:false does not give a right results: (%i1) radexpand:false; (%o1) false(%i2) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x,0,%pi); (%o2) 0 (wrong) (%i3) integrate(abs(sin(x)),x,0,%pi); (%o3) 2 (right, but occasionally) (%i4) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x,0,2*%pi); (%o4) 0 (wrong) (%i5) integrate(abs(sin(x)),x,0,2*%pi); (%o5) 0 (wrong) (%i6) wxplot2d(sqrt(1cos(t)^2),[t,0,2*%pi],[x,1,7],[y,2,2]); (%t6) << Graphics >> (%i7) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x,0,%pi); (%o7) 0 (wrong) (%i8) integrate(abs(cos(x)),x,0,%pi); (%o8) integrate(abs(cos(x)),x,0,%pi) (no action)  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110312 22:35 Message: Both examples are correct, when setting the option variable radexpand to false: (%i1) radexpand:false$ (%i2) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); (%o2) 1 (%i3) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); (%o3) 1 By the way, the indefinite integrals are more correct too: (%i4) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x); (%o4) 1/sqrt(tan(x)^2+1) (%i5) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x); (%o5) tan(x)/sqrt(tan(x)^2+1) I think it is a general problem, that the option variable radexpand introduces wrong simplifications. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199638&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 23:42:36

Bugs item #3153395, was opened at 20110108 18:50 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3153395&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: Tests Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Wont Fix Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: a1a (a1a) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: make check fails maxima5.23.0 fedora13 64bit Initial Comment: after configure make gcl is the version fresh from yum! maxima5.23.0>make check Making check in admin make[1]: Entering directory `/home/software/maxima5.23.0/admin' make[1]: Nothing to be done for `check'. make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/software/maxima5.23.0/admin' Making check in src ../admin/make_share_list Making check in tests make[1]: Entering directory `/home/software/maxima5.23.0/tests' echo "Running test suite with gcl..."; \ /bin/sh ../maximalocal lisp=gcl batchstring="run_testsuite();" < /dev/null Running test suite with gcl... /bin/sh: line 1: 21428 Segmentation fault (core dumped) /bin/sh ../maximalocal lisp=gcl batchstring="run_testsuite();" < /dev/null make[1]: *** [checkgcl] Error 139 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/software/maxima5.23.0/tests' make: *** [checkrecursive] Error 1 and of course mxima dosn't work!  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110313 00:42 Message: The problem is not present with sbcl as reported in the last posting. At this time, closing this bug report as won't fix, because it might be a special problem with gcl only. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: a1a (a1a) Date: 20110108 20:30 Message: when I use sbcl instead of gcl then all is ok  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3153395&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 23:34:46

Bugs item #3153434, was opened at 20110108 20:37 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3153434&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  Assume Group: To be reviewed >Status: Closed >Resolution: Invalid Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Incorrect logical values Initial Comment: Maxima <= 5.23.0: (%i1) is (sech(x) = 1/cosh(x)); (%o1) false (%i2) is (sech(x) = (2/(exp(x)+exp(x)))); (%o2) false WolframAlpha: Input: Sech[x] == 1/Cosh[x] Result: True  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110313 00:34 Message: It is not expected that the function equal can determine the equivalence of the reported examples. This is documented: "is(equal(a, b)) returns true (or false) if and only if a and b are equal (or not equal) for all possible values of their variables, as determined by evaluating ratsimp(a  b)" Maxima has in addition the function zeroequiv which works for the reported examples: (%i1) zeroequiv(sech(x)1/cosh(x),x); (%o1) true (%i2) zeroequiv(sech(x)(2/(exp(x)+exp(x))),x); (%o2) true It might be a feature request to extend the functionality of the command is(equal(a,b)). Closing this bug report as "invalid". Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3153434&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 23:17:07

Bugs item #3155351, was opened at 20110111 10:43 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3155351&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: Share Libraries Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Works For Me Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Blahota István (blahota) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Package stats doesn't work in 5.23.0 Initial Comment: I wanted to use simple statistics, like "test_mean", and I didn't get real result. I also tried another stats functions, they don't work. (For example 'mean'.) See attached wxmx (wxMaxima) file.  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110313 00:17 Message: At first, the attached xmlFile is not helpful. It is much better to insert the most import part of the example directly into the posting. If it is necessary to attach a file, it would be helpful to attach a file in plain text, so it is readable with any editor. >From the xmlfile I see that the loading of the file grcommon.lisp fails. I think this problem is no longer present in the current version Maxima 5.23.2 Closing this bug report as "works for me". Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Blahota István (blahota) Date: 20110111 10:44 Message: Sorry, it is duplicated...  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3155351&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 21:35:22

Bugs item #3181353, was opened at 20110214 23:06 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3181353&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: Nils Bruin (nbruin) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Documentation of "at" misleading Initial Comment: The documentation of "at" says that "substitutions are made in series, not in parallel". However (thankfully) that does not seem to be the case: (%i1) at(f(x,y),[x=x+y,y=xy]); (%o1) f(y + x, x  y) (%i2) at(at(f(x,y),x=x+y),y=xy); (%o2) f(2 x  y, x  y) (%i3) at(at(f(x,y),y=xy),x=x+y); (%o3) f(y + x, x) Clearly, this is the desired behaviour, but it's at odds with the documentation. Perhaps adjust the documentation?  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110312 22:35 Message: Fixed in Expressions.texi revision 1.72 Closing this bug report as fixed. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3181353&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 20:35:42

Bugs item #3199638, was opened at 20110304 15:07 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199638&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: dstanislav (ssllvv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integrate_sqrt_of_trig Initial Comment: (%i1) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); (%o1)  1 ( right answer: 1 ) (%i2) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); Is tan(x) positive or negative?p; (%o2)  1 ( right answer: 1 )  Maxima version: 5.23.2 Maxima build date: 17:9 1/17/2011 Host type: i686pcmingw32 Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8   >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110312 21:35 Message: Both examples are correct, when setting the option variable radexpand to false: (%i1) radexpand:false$ (%i2) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); (%o2) 1 (%i3) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); (%o3) 1 By the way, the indefinite integrals are more correct too: (%i4) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x); (%o4) 1/sqrt(tan(x)^2+1) (%i5) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x); (%o5) tan(x)/sqrt(tan(x)^2+1) I think it is a general problem, that the option variable radexpand introduces wrong simplifications. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199638&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 20:11:15

Bugs item #3200565, was opened at 20110305 16:37 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3200565&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: johappy (johappy) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: problem with "makelist" Initial Comment: a[i]:=a0*q^i; a0:1;q:1/2; a[9]; ==> 1/512 that´s o.k. a[10]; ==> q^10 ???? makelist(a[i],i,1,12); ==> [1/2,1/4,1/8,1/16,1/32,1/64,1/128,1/256,1/512,q^10,1/2048,1/4096] ??? a[10] is not evaluated !!  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110312 21:11 Message: I do not see the observed problem. I get the following result: (%i1) a[i]:=a0*q^i$ (%i2) a0:1$ q:1/2$ (%i4) makelist(a[i],i,1,12); (%o4) [1/2,1/4,1/8,1/16,1/32,1/64,1/128,1/256,1/512,1/1024, 1/2048,1/4096] I can reproduce the example with the following input: (%i1) a[i]:=a0*q^i$ (%i2) a0:1$ (%i3) a[10]; (%o3) q^10 (%i4) q:1/2$ (%i5) makelist(a[i],i,1,12); (%o5) [1/2,1/4,1/8,1/16,1/32,1/64,1/128,1/256,1/512,q^10,1/2048, 1/4096] Perhaps, in an earlier step a value was assigned to a[10] like in the example from above. 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=3200565&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 17:10:28

Bugs item #3207885, was opened at 20110312 17:54 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3207885&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: Deleted >Resolution: Duplicate Priority: 2 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Option variable lognumer has no effect Initial Comment: The documented option variable lognumer has no effect. There is no code, which handles this option variable. (%i2) log(1.5); (%o2) 3.141592653589793*%i+.4054651081081644 (%i3) log(1.5),lognumer:true; (%o3) 3.141592653589793*%i+.4054651081081644 I suggest to cut out the documentation for lognumer. Dieter Kaiser  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110312 18:10 Message: This is a duplicate of bug report ID:3207833. Deleting this bug report as a duplicate. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3207885&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 16:54:45

Bugs item #3207885, was opened at 20110312 17:54 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3207885&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: 2 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Option variable lognumer has no effect Initial Comment: The documented option variable lognumer has no effect. There is no code, which handles this option variable. (%i2) log(1.5); (%o2) 3.141592653589793*%i+.4054651081081644 (%i3) log(1.5),lognumer:true; (%o3) 3.141592653589793*%i+.4054651081081644 I suggest to cut out the documentation for lognumer. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3207885&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110312 15:27:14

Bugs item #3207833, was opened at 20110312 16:27 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3207833&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: 2 Private: No Submitted By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Option variable lognumer has no effect Initial Comment: The documented option variable lognumer has no effect. There is no code, which handles this option variable. (%i2) log(1.5); (%o2) 3.141592653589793*%i+.4054651081081644 (%i3) log(1.5),lognumer:true; (%o3) 3.141592653589793*%i+.4054651081081644 I suggest to cut out the documentation for lognumer. Dieter Kaiser  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3207833&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110309 21:26:48

Bugs item #3138054, was opened at 20101215 18:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by crategus You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3138054&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: bh () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: bfloat problem / FIX Initial Comment: exp(gamma(1/3)),float; exp(gamma(1/3)),numer; exp(gamma(1/3)),bfloat; 14.56961993923131 14.56961993923131 5.691257639728396b2 Maxima version: 5.22post Maxima build date: 22:21 12/10/2010 Host type: x86_64appledarwin10.5.0 Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45  >Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110309 22:26 Message: Fixed as suggested in float.lisp revision 1.67 Closing this bug report as fixed. Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20101216 01:18 Message: Proposed fix: (defmfun $bfloat (x) (let (y) (cond ((bigfloatp x)) ((or (numberp x) (member x '($%e $%pi $%gamma) :test #'eq)) (bcons (intofp x))) ((or (atom x) (member 'array (cdar x) :test #'eq)) (if (eq x '$%phi) ($bfloat '((mtimes simp) ((rat simp) 1 2) ((mplus simp) 1 ((mexpt simp) 5 ((rat simp) 1 2))))) x)) ((eq (caar x) 'mexpt) (if (equal (cadr x) '$%e) (*fpexp ($bfloat (caddr x))) ;; <missing bfloat (exptbigfloat ($bfloat (cadr x)) (caddr x))))  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3138054&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110308 12:27:40

Bugs item #3202926, was opened at 20110308 13:21 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by pangard You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3202926&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: PAngArd (pangard) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: simplify_sum gives wrong answer for sum related to poisson.. Initial Comment: The following should give the variance of a poisson RV with parameter lambda=4 (it should be 4) (%i98) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k4)^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf));  4 284 %e (%o98)  3 What's amazing is that if (k4)^2 is split, then the individual results are all correct: (%i99) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*k^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o99) 20 (%i100) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*k*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o100) 4 (%i101) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o101) 1 And the completely symbolic sum is also correct: (%i102) simplify_sum(sum(%e^l*(kl)^2*l^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o102) l Some similar sum produce correct results: (%i106) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k2)^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf));  4 (%o106) 8 %e while others do not: (%i104) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k5)^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf));  4 643 %e (%o104)  3 I couldn't find a pattern!  >Comment By: PAngArd (pangard) Date: 20110308 13:27 Message: Ooops, the report above has some issues: * output is not formatted, the wrong answer for the first command is: (284/3)*%e^(4) * I claimed that the result of simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k2)^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); was correct, but it is not. The correct result is 8, not 8%e^(4). However, the random behaviour persists: A correct result: (%i110) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k^215)*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o110) 5 An incorrect result: (%i109) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k^216)*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (740/3)%e^(4)  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3202926&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110308 12:21:35

Bugs item #3202926, was opened at 20110308 13:21 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by pangard You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3202926&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: PAngArd (pangard) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: simplify_sum gives wrong answer for sum related to poisson.. Initial Comment: The following should give the variance of a poisson RV with parameter lambda=4 (it should be 4) (%i98) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k4)^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf));  4 284 %e (%o98)  3 What's amazing is that if (k4)^2 is split, then the individual results are all correct: (%i99) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*k^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o99) 20 (%i100) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*k*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o100) 4 (%i101) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o101) 1 And the completely symbolic sum is also correct: (%i102) simplify_sum(sum(%e^l*(kl)^2*l^k/k!, k, 0, inf)); (%o102) l Some similar sum produce correct results: (%i106) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k2)^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf));  4 (%o106) 8 %e while others do not: (%i104) simplify_sum(sum(%e^4*(k5)^2*4^k/k!, k, 0, inf));  4 643 %e (%o104)  3 I couldn't find a pattern!  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3202926&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110307 21:43:05

Bugs item #3199708, was opened at 20110304 10:36 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199708&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  Integration Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: dstanislav (ssllvv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integrate(sin(2x)atan(sin(x)),x) Initial Comment: (%i1) integrate(sin(2*x)*atan(sin(x)),x); gives too complicated result (%o1) ((cos(2*x)3)*atan2(sin(2*x)+2*sin(x),cos(2*x)+2*cos(x)1)+(cos(2*x)3)*atan2(sin(2*x)2*sin(x),cos(2*x)+2*cos(x)+1)+4*sin(x))/4 and (%i2) integrate(sin(2*x)*atan(sin(x)),x,0,%pi/2); gives wrong (%o2) %pi/21 at the same time (%i3) integrate(2*sin(x)*cos(x)*atan(sin(x)),x),expand; gives more useful result (%o3) sin(x)^2*atan(sin(x))+atan(sin(x))sin(x) and (%i4) integrate(2*sin(x)*cos(x)*atan(sin(x)),x,0,%pi/2),expand; gives proper answer (%o4) %pi/21 hence the bug in (%i1) and (%i2) need be fixed ____________________________________________ Maxima version: 5.23.2 Maxima build date: 17:9 1/17/2011 Host type: i686pcmingw32 Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20110307 16:43 Message: fixed in sin.lisp rev 1.83. continue w/ monstertrig if not all trig args alike, rather than passing off to risch.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199708&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110306 13:04:15

Bugs item #3201256, was opened at 20110306 15:04 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by ssllvv You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3201256&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: dstanislav (ssllvv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integration_with_logabs Initial Comment: It would be very good if parametr "logabs" allways take effect. (%i1) integrate(sin(x)/cos(x),x),logabs; (%o1) log(abs(cos(x))) (%i2) integrate(tan(x),x),logabs; (%o2) log(sec(x)) In command (%i2) logabs does not work?  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3201256&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110305 15:37:03

Bugs item #3200565, was opened at 20110305 16:37 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by johappy You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3200565&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: johappy (johappy) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: problem with "makelist" Initial Comment: a[i]:=a0*q^i; a0:1;q:1/2; a[9]; ==> 1/512 that´s o.k. a[10]; ==> q^10 ???? makelist(a[i],i,1,12); ==> [1/2,1/4,1/8,1/16,1/32,1/64,1/128,1/256,1/512,q^10,1/2048,1/4096] ??? a[10] is not evaluated !!  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3200565&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110305 14:31:31

Bugs item #3198530, was opened at 20110303 09:50 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by dgildea You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3198530&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: Fixed Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Apparently wrong limit with factorial Initial Comment: As reported at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10868 This is correct: (%i3) limit(2+1/factorial(n),n,inf); (%o3) 2 This does not seem to be: (%i4) limit(1/(2+1/factorial(n)),n,inf); (%o4) 1 This happens in both of the following.  Maxima version: 5.23.2 Maxima build date: 9:43 3/3/2011 Host type: i686appledarwin10.6.0 Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.24  Maxima version: 5.22.1 Maxima build date: 9:38 3/1/2011 Host type: i686appledarwin10.6.0 Lisp implementation type: ECL Lisp implementation version: 10.4.1  >Comment By: Dan Gildea (dgildea) Date: 20110305 09:31 Message: Fixed in limit.lisp rev 1.106.  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3198530&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110304 15:36:06

Bugs item #3199708, was opened at 20110304 17:36 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by ssllvv You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199708&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  Integration Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: dstanislav (ssllvv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integrate(sin(2x)atan(sin(x)),x) Initial Comment: (%i1) integrate(sin(2*x)*atan(sin(x)),x); gives too complicated result (%o1) ((cos(2*x)3)*atan2(sin(2*x)+2*sin(x),cos(2*x)+2*cos(x)1)+(cos(2*x)3)*atan2(sin(2*x)2*sin(x),cos(2*x)+2*cos(x)+1)+4*sin(x))/4 and (%i2) integrate(sin(2*x)*atan(sin(x)),x,0,%pi/2); gives wrong (%o2) %pi/21 at the same time (%i3) integrate(2*sin(x)*cos(x)*atan(sin(x)),x),expand; gives more useful result (%o3) sin(x)^2*atan(sin(x))+atan(sin(x))sin(x) and (%i4) integrate(2*sin(x)*cos(x)*atan(sin(x)),x,0,%pi/2),expand; gives proper answer (%o4) %pi/21 hence the bug in (%i1) and (%i2) need be fixed ____________________________________________ Maxima version: 5.23.2 Maxima build date: 17:9 1/17/2011 Host type: i686pcmingw32 Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199708&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110304 14:07:55

Bugs item #3199638, was opened at 20110304 16:07 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by ssllvv You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199638&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: dstanislav (ssllvv) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: integrate_sqrt_of_trig Initial Comment: (%i1) integrate(sqrt(1cos(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); (%o1)  1 ( right answer: 1 ) (%i2) integrate(sqrt(1sin(x)^2),x,0,%pi/2); Is tan(x) positive or negative?p; (%o2)  1 ( right answer: 1 )  Maxima version: 5.23.2 Maxima build date: 17:9 1/17/2011 Host type: i686pcmingw32 Lisp implementation type: GNU Common Lisp (GCL) Lisp implementation version: GCL 2.6.8   You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3199638&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110303 22:20:07

Bugs item #3155930, was opened at 20110111 23:15 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sfrobot You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3155930&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: Share Libraries Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: Works For Me Priority: 4 Private: No Submitted By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: antid gives stack overflow Initial Comment: The antidiff function works pretty well, but it should handle problems it can't do more gracefully: (Lisp Clozure Common Lisp Version 1.6dev (WindowsX8632) (%i2) antidiff(diff(f(x),x,a) * f(x)^x,x,f(x)); Maxima encountered a Lisp error: Stack overflow on value stack. A nounform would be better than a Lisp error.  >Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sfrobot) Date: 20110303 22:20 Message: This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by the administrator of this Tracker).  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110217 21:32 Message: As written in the last posting I can not observe an error with the current Maxima version. Setting the status to pending and the resolution to "works for me". Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Dieter Kaiser (crategus) Date: 20110113 16:43 Message: I do not observe Lisp errors. All examples work and give a noun form. In revision 1.4 of antid.mac a check was added to avoid endless loops. Maxima version: 5.23post Maxima build date: 11:42 1/8/2011 Host type: i686pclinuxgnu Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.45 (%i5) antidiff(diff(f(x),x,a) * f(x)^x,x,f(x)); (%o5) antidiff(f(x)^x*'diff(f(x),x,a),x,f(x)) (%i6) antidiff(diff(f(x),x,a) + diff(f(x),x,b),x,f(x)); (%o6) antidiff('diff(f(x),x,b)+'diff(f(x),x,a),x,f(x)) (%i7) antidiff(diff(f(x) * (f(x)+1)^a,x),x,f(x)); (%o7) antidiff((f(x)+1)^a*'diff(f(x),x,1) +a*f(x)*(f(x)+1)^(a1)*'diff(f(x),x,1),x,f(x)) Dieter Kaiser  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20110113 11:53 Message: Another example: (%i12) antidiff(diff(f(x) * (f(x)+1)^a,x),x,f(x)); "Is "a" zero or nonzero?"nonzero; First reported : http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/2009/015605.html  Comment By: Barton Willis (willisbl) Date: 20110112 11:12 Message: Related, but more simple: (%i4) antidiff(diff(f(x),x,a) + diff(f(x),x,b),x,f(x)); Maxima encountered a Lisp error:  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3155930&group_id=4933 
From: SourceForge.net <noreply@so...>  20110303 14:50:40

Bugs item #3198530, was opened at 20110303 14:50 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3198530&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: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: https://www.google.com/accounts () Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Apparently wrong limit with factorial Initial Comment: As reported at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10868 This is correct: (%i3) limit(2+1/factorial(n),n,inf); (%o3) 2 This does not seem to be: (%i4) limit(1/(2+1/factorial(n)),n,inf); (%o4) 1 This happens in both of the following.  Maxima version: 5.23.2 Maxima build date: 9:43 3/3/2011 Host type: i686appledarwin10.6.0 Lisp implementation type: SBCL Lisp implementation version: 1.0.24  Maxima version: 5.22.1 Maxima build date: 9:38 3/1/2011 Host type: i686appledarwin10.6.0 Lisp implementation type: ECL Lisp implementation version: 10.4.1  You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=104933&aid=3198530&group_id=4933 