Good day,
> You have to think in a slightly different way when approaching a problem
> with computer algebra.
I know when something *could* be done and is not being done. I know when
something is not being done for good reasons. The examples I gave were
problems Maxima has to be able to solve. So far, I've learned that half
of the could be solved using the right settings.
We are left with the other half. Why is it that other Computer Systems
can solve these and not Maxima? Well, I'm looking at it right now,
trying to figure out if I can go from 50% to 100% the same way I went
from 0% to 50%.
There is no way I will accept having to factor and expand stuff. I use
Computer Algebra to save time, not waste it. Other packages are beyond
that now. Maxima has to match (in some way) the abilities of the other
packages. Unfortunately, I'm not an algebra specialist and I cannot be
expected to expand Maxima.
> Incidentally, I have used Maple for a number of years and there are many
> situations in which I find it frustrating to use.
It is.
I'm very much a Mathcad user and it is very frustrating. Not to mention
that it is a proprietary solution and I don't think my (freely
available, publishable, reproducible) research should be based on
proprietary software.
Some think for teaching. I would feel much better teaching a course
using free (as in "open source") software rather than feeding some
marketing hype.
So far though, Maxima has shown itself to be even more frustrating (what is it with the evil user interface?).
I'm ready to cope with this just to see if it is a learning curve thing
or if Maxima is really frustrating.
--
Daniel Lemire, Ph.D.
http://www.ondelette.com/