On Monday, March 20, 2017 at 11:50:00 PM UTC-7, parisse wrote: > > I think that people who never wrote symbolic integration algorithms > underestimate the work required (this is also true in other areas, for > example simplification, UI, etc.). I believe that the current symbolic > integration implementations are good enough whatever you choose in Maxima, > Axiom flavours or Giac. If someone can improve using rubi or something > else, that's fine, but I don't believe this will be the reason why the vast > majority of people will choose one or another CAS. >
I agree. I think one reason Macsyma Inc went out of business is that they spent time improving parts of the system that made it look good on benchmarks proposed by other vendors, rather than addressing important applications. For example, polynomial factorization benchmarks. I don't recall integration benchmarks, but I would not be surprised. The Rubi benchmarks significantly include one measure of the quality of the result (how close to "optimal" in size) for integration. Not just the speed or coverage. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
