On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Gabor Grothendieck <ggrothendi...@gmail.com> wrote: > ...Also while Maxima is more sophisticated in terms of algorithms,
Glad to hear it... (I first worked on Maxima in 1971...) > yacas is actually more sophisticated from the viewpoint of its language which > borrows ideas from both imperative and prolog programming It is true that Yacas has a nicer syntax for its pattern-matching functionality than Maxima, but I think they are fundamentally very similar. In particular, as far as I can tell, neither does backtracking or unification, so neither is very Prolog-like. > and its interfaces are more sophisticated (it is one of the few CAS systems > that developed an OpenMath interface) and its socket server is > used by the Ryacas interface. Maxima interfaces to a variety of other systems via sockets. It does not have an OpenMath interface (yet!), but I don't know how useful that is compared to other linearized tree structures. > yacas can also translate math expressions to TeX and do exact arithmetic. Maxima can also output TeX and do exact rational arithmetic and arbitrary-precision floating-point arithmetic. Maxima also handles a variety of cases which apparently Yacas doesn't, like factorization of multivariate polynomials (seems pretty basic!), many special functions, etc. Maxima also has an active user and development community. -s ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.