Le jeudi 27 novembre 2014 02:46:26 UTC+1, Robert Dodier a écrit :
>
> On 2014-11-26, Han Frederic > wrote:
>
> > Hi, I have tried the factorization with giacpy. (cf trac 12375).
> > I had to expexpand first before factoring and did this:
> >
> > sage: from giacpy import libgiac
> > sage: x=l
On 2014-11-26, Han Frederic wrote:
> Hi, I have tried the factorization with giacpy. (cf trac 12375).
> I had to expexpand first before factoring and did this:
>
> sage: from giacpy import libgiac
> sage: x=libgiac('x')
> sage: s=exp(1024*(x+1))-1
> sage: %time s.expexpand().factor()
> CPU times:
>
> Incidentally I observe that Sympy has the same behavior, so we can't
> just nick their factoring algorithm -- maybe some other package we can
> try the same example to see if any of them handle it quickly?
>
> best
>
> Robert Dodier
>
> Hi, I have tried the factorization with giacpy. (cf
if you are looking to proof equivalence to zero, you could use the
zeroequiv command in maxima, which is
going to be, in general, pretty fast. But as i recall, if it says "false"
that merely means it could not prove the
expression is zero. Look for discussion of bugs / features in maxima
mai
On Friday, November 7, 2014 1:43:13 PM UTC-8, Thierry
(sage-googlesucks@xxx) wrote:
>
> > Incidentally I observe that Sympy has the same behavior, so we can't
> > just nick their factoring algorithm -- maybe some other package we can
> > try the same example to see if any of them handle it quick
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 03:07:36AM +, Robert Dodier wrote:
> On 2014-11-05, Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 3:46:55 PM UTC-8, Robert Dodier wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't know a work-around for is(equal(1,exp(256*(x+1. As always,
> >> a bug report will be very helpful
On 2014-11-05, Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 3:46:55 PM UTC-8, Robert Dodier wrote:
>>
>> I don't know a work-around for is(equal(1,exp(256*(x+1. As always,
>> a bug report will be very helpful. http://sourceforge.net/p/maxima/bugs
> I'm not so sure it's a bug or that so
On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 3:46:55 PM UTC-8, Robert Dodier wrote:
>
> I don't know a work-around for is(equal(1,exp(256*(x+1. As always,
> a bug report will be very helpful. http://sourceforge.net/p/maxima/bugs
>
I'm not so sure it's a bug or that something can be done about it, but you
c
On 2014-11-04, Nils Bruin wrote:
> sage DOES call Maxima with
>
> is (equal(1,exp(256*(x+1;
>
> which indeed can take quite a while. In fact, profile data indicates nearly
> all time reported is spent on that statement.
A stack trace shows that Maxima is trying to factor 1 - exp(256*(x + 1)
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,
> fullra
On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 11:38:33 AM UTC-8, Nils Bruin wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 10:54:51 AM UTC-8, rjf wrote:
>>
>>
>> Sage apparently does not call Maxima for this, since
>> is(equal(0,exp(512*(x+1; takes 0.05ms, even if one
>> provides the irrelevant declare(x,re
On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 10:54:51 AM UTC-8, rjf wrote:
>
>
> Sage apparently does not call Maxima for this, since
> is(equal(0,exp(512*(x+1; takes 0.05ms, even if one
> provides the irrelevant declare(x,real).
>
> Indeed, sage doesn't call Maxima with *that* statement because it wo
On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 9:52:03 AM UTC-8, kcrisman wrote:
>
> Interesting. Since this assumption stuff does something in Maxima,
> perhaps that is where the slowdown happens. I'm not sure that we ask
> Maxima to check for our equality, though perhaps it comes into play once
> that assum
Interesting. Since this assumption stuff does something in Maxima, perhaps
that is where the slowdown happens. I'm not sure that we ask Maxima to
check for our equality, though perhaps it comes into play once that
assumption is made.
> Hi,
>
> I know that comparing symbolic expressions of
14 matches
Mail list logo
