On 04/20/11 10:13 AM, Jason Grout wrote:
On 4/20/11 3:50 AM, Dr. David Kirkby wrote:
This is interesting.
http://code.google.com/p/symja/
Apparently it can parse a large percentage of the Mathematica language
and has nearly 295 functions. I note it has "D[]" and "Integrate[]" as
two of them.
You can try it online at
http://mobmath.appspot.com/
Interesting. Looking through the docs to the integration functions leads
to this website with a large number of rules for integration, which
claims that in some cases, it performs much better than MMA and Maple:
http://www.apmaths.uwo.ca/~arich/
Jason
Though I can't find it now, I've seen that site before, and there was (is??)
something on the site to say that the good results compared to the commercial
products is to be expected. I can't recall the reasons, but I suspect it is
based on the fact that the tests are used during the software development. If
you know in advance what the tests are, its a lot easier to tweak the code to
give the right results.
It's interesting that Mathematica 7 performed significantly better than Maple
13, with slightly less "messy" results and around a third of the number of
incorrect results (0.9% for Mathematica, 2.7% for Maple). From discussions I've
had with Vladimir Bondarenko, he is of the opinion that Wolfram Research take
quality control more seriously than Maplesoft.
--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Dave
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
