As to the point of "community goals" I have a proposal to make.
Since the stated goal of Sage is to be a viable alternative to
the 4Ms it makes sense to develop a "measure" of how close the
goal is approached.
Maple has a Kamke ordinary differential equation test set.
Maple can do almost all of the ODEs in that set.
How well does Sage do, where is Sage weak, and what needs to be
developed in order to be a Maple alternative?
Bonderenko has a 4000 integral test suite used against Maple and MMA.
How well does Sage do, where is Sage weak, and what needs to be
developed in order to be an MMA alternative?
Axiom has a 619 integral Schaums test suite.
How well does Sage do, where is Sage weak, and what needs to be
developed in order to be a Axiom alternative?
Are there any other major test suite collections available?
Is there one for limits? For finite fields? For linear algebra?
If not, can people be sponsored to collect them?
Perhaps Sage could host a test suite site that shows the results
of running the test suite against the competition. Something like:
Schaums' test suite (619 indefinite integrals)
Axiom: 419 passed,
137 no closed form exists.
60 cannot simplify
2 Schaums typos found
1 Axiom bug found
MMA:
Maple:
Sage:
Kamke test suite
Bonderenko test suite
etc.
Students could be hired to perform the test suite collection and
computation. There can be no question of python-vs-C, ad-hominem,
free-vs-paid, or any other argument.
This is where Sage gets to prove it really is a 4Ms alternative.
Tim
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
