On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 8:28 AM, rjf <fate...@gmail.com> wrote: > From the proposal > > > ... and which has sophisti- > cated interfaces to nearly all other mathematics software, including > Mathematica, Maple, > MATLAB and Magma. ... > > > Maxima just gets no respect. :) > Most of the facilities mentioned are already in Maxima.
I wish... > And why is Cython much more than a Python to C translator? (This is > not sarcasm. I honestly have no idea that it was more. > I thought it was, if anything, less.) It is much, much more than that. So now you know. > "venerable" Maxima is mentioned once, suggesting that the only thing > it can do is symbolic integration and numeric integration. > Actually, while Maxima includes library access to Fortran methods, it > is far inferior to what could be done in numeric integration, > as demonstrated by recent Mathematica versions. You would hardly get a > hint that 75% of the sage-support messages are about Maxima. No they aren't. Moreover, there isn't anything in the proposal that uses Maxima at all. The proposal is about numpy/scipy/PDE/linear algebra/algebraic topology/group theory/differential algebra/pynac; this is all independent from Maxima. > Maybe what is needed is a Fortran to Python translator. :-) > I think that if NSF sent the proposal over to computer science and > engineering, it might not get a great reception, but it is hard to > predict such things. As I mentioned at the top of this thread, the proposal is to the the computational mathematics program, which is part of DMS = "Division of Mathematical Sciences". -- William -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
