On Dec 8, 10:45 am, kcrisman <kcris...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And why should anyone care? Do you think that Wolfram Alpha will last > > longer than Mathematica? > > I think the point was that not everyone who might want to do this > would have access to Mma, but that (for now) they would all have > access to W|A. Just to clarify - I don't really have a horse in this > race. > > - kcrisman
Right, that would be the case where both Sage and Wolfram Alpha last longer than the University of Washington, (or at least UW's Mathematica license). A great idea: not only have the recipient of Sage redundantly spend a CPU day or two recompiling everything, but have each recipient send a few thousand duplicative "tests" to Wolfram Alpha. I hope the sarcasm is evident. On the testing front, you could test random polynomials for a very long time and not find this bug in Mathematica (and maybe something like it in Sage). Expand[(x^(2^(2^29))+1)^2] though that may be a problem only on 32-bit Mathematica systems. VB's "bugs" tend not to be of the form "break glass with hammer", but of the form "multiply and divide by a complicated expression, with an integration in the middle". Oh, the complicated expression is actually zero, but you didn't notice. Now VB can find a bug in nearly every non-trivial operation P. just use P instead of "integration". Is this useful? maybe. maybe not. A determined adversary can break any system that is sufficiently open-ended. Open enough to be able to generate a number that can't be stored. RJF -- 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
