On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 11:59:18 AM UTC-8, rjf wrote: > > For Sage, I think > a better approach if you are going to use Maxima, might be to something > like .. > > is (simplify(1-exp(256*(x+1)) = 0) > > where "simplify" is some particular simplification program, e.g. ratsimp, > fullratsimp, radcan, ... >
which happens in test_relation_maxima, after the is(equal(...)) class has returned "unknown". Is your suggestion to try the simplification approaches before? If so, what's your reasoning (apart from the fact that is(equal(...)) currently seems to have a bug that makes it take unduly long). > For radcan() the time reported on my computer is 0.0000 sec > >> >> which indeed can take quite a while. In fact, profile data indicates >> nearly all time reported is spent on that statement. >> >> The relevant routine is test_relation_maxima in sage/symbolic/relation.py >> . The routine could use a facelift (it's doing a lot of strings-based stuff >> that doesn't need to be done strings-based anymore), but the bottleneck for >> this example seems to be entirely in maxima. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
