I think that if *students *are using Sage to access the integration program in Maxima, they could just use Maxima.
If they are choosing an integration program based on speed, they must have a very very old computer, since almost any student problem is done instantly. By almost any program. Implementing Rubi is certainly feasible. "Converting" the Mathematica code to python means writing a pattern matching program that parses the Rubi code in python. And figuring out what simplifications are inherent in it. There is already such a pattern matching program in Lisp, so doing it in python is not actually necessary. But maybe someone has done it anyway. Who can be sure? As I have said before, the objective of most students taking calculus is to pass the course so they never have to know any of this integration stuff ever again. Thus computer systems are useful primarily to help them do homework (cheat?). And for this work, Maxima is probably sufficient. Learning to do symbolic integration "by hand" is a useful test of "can you do algebra". Beyond that, it's not really a vital part of most occupations in say, engineering. The only job that I can think of that really requires knowledge of these methods is "calculus teacher". On Wednesday, March 1, 2017 at 11:13:38 AM UTC-8, saad khalid wrote: > > I think Sage's integration can't compare to Mathematica's. The output is > not as clean and it doesn't solve as many integrals and it is not as fast. > Sage is used by many students, and in my opinion, its profitability and > sustainability in the future depends on classroom use, to a large extent. > For that reason alone, I think it is worthwhile to make integration cleaner > and better, as that is what the majority of students do. I'm not sure what > the qualm against adding thousands of rules is. If it's more efficient and > effective, why does it matter if its similar to a student who simply > "memorizes the formulas." Also, saying that we can integrate better than > mathematica is definitely a solid advertising point. > > My main question is why this is so difficult to implement. Is the > difficulty in implementing the "if-then-else"/binary-search-tree method? Or > is it with converting the mathematica code to python? I have a hard time > believing it's the latter. It's just that several people have said now that > implementing Rubi is unfeasible, and I don't totally understand why. Could > someone clarify this for me? > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
