> Yes, but the limit algorithm is easy to understand. And Gary is > writting the base symbolics, so you don't need some high math to do > that. >
Then who will write the real stuff? > $ make > make all-recursive > make[1]: Entering directory `/home/ondra/ext/giac-0.8.0' > Making all in src > make[2]: Entering directory `/home/ondra/ext/giac-0.8.0/src' > /bin/sh ../libtool --mode=compile g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I. > -I.. -g -O2 -c sym2poly.cc > mkdir .libs > g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I. -I.. -g -O2 -c sym2poly.cc -fPIC > -DPIC -o .libs/sym2poly.lo > In file included from poly.h:26, > from sym2poly.h:24, > from sym2poly.cc:32: > index.h:273: error: expected initializer before '<' token > index.h:275: error: 'hash_index' was not declared in this scope > index.h:275: error: template argument 1 is invalid > index.h:275: error: template argument 2 is invalid > Now I would have to investigate the first error: > > index.h:273: error: expected initializer before '<' token > I guess you are running a version of gcc which is > to 4.2. Someone else told me about the same kind of error. If this is the case, since I compile on gcc 4.1 or 4.2 and do not have access to 4.3 or >, it has to wait. Or you have to compile with gcc 4.1 or 4.2. > If I take Sage or SymPy, on the same installation of Debian, it just works. Well, running isympy was not really easy for me. On my laptop, I have a stable debian distribution from 2005, where python is too old. Therefore I tried on a server, where python is up to date, but I had a problem with the output a lot of รข for e.g. fraction bars, or nothing visible for the symbol i you are using for sqrt(-1). I checked with xterm, uxterm, without luck. Then I got it running with gnome- terminal. I believe there is a clear distinction between CAS end-users who really want binaries with an installer (which I provide for windows, mac and linux packages so that they don't have install problems) and developers who should have a little bit of Unix background in order to solve simple install problems, because their installation might differ from install where the source has been compiled before. I will of course do my best so that the compilation process works out of the box, but I don't think it should be an excuse not to try it further and collaborate with the author/maintainer to fix the things. > > I won't do anything before someone is really interested. It would be a > > waste of time, because I don't know python (and learning python to a > > fluent level certainly requires some time), I don't know exactly what > > to do and I would not have a reasonable insurance that my library > > would be integrated in the sage distribution. > > Yes, that is the real reason (and it's not your fault). But who better > should do it if not the one who wrote the C++ code? > That could be done if there was a document somewhere clearly explaining how to interact between sage and your library or binary. Something like the documentation of texmacs for writing plugins. If something like that exists, I would be glad to have a pointer to it. Otherwise, I can't do it on my own on a reasonable time schedule. > Ok. My point was that the pure fact, that someone wrote the code > already and the code is sitting somewhere (be it in giac, or axiom) is > not enough to be > easily usable by people. Because if it was, people would be using > Axiom and be happy with that. Some people are happy, but a lot of > people aren't, as can be seen by the number of people using Sage. > I do not have exact figures of xcas users, and of course axiom users or maxima users, but there are definitively many xcas, axiom and maxima users out there. I agree that xcas lacks developers. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
