Furthermore, it sometimes happens that Maxima's knowledge is not used in all
the places that it might be used for reasons of efficiency, or because the
feature was programmed before the "assume" facility existed and was not
fixed to use it.
How much work do you want "for i:a step b thru c do ... when it compares
a+i*b to c? I haven't looked at the code, but I would be surprised if
assumptions were used there. :)
RJF
> -----Original Message-----
> From: maxima-admin at math.utexas.edu [mailto:maxima-admin at math.utexas.edu]
> On Behalf Of Stavros Macrakis
> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 7:34 AM
> To: none none
> Cc: Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> Subject: Re: [Maxima] simplification based on assumptions
>
> Unfortunately, Maxima does not currently know that a>b implies a>b-5 :
>
> assume(a>b)$
> is(a>b-5);
> => Maxima was unable to evaluate the predicate
>
> Obviously this sort of thing should be improved.
>
>
> On 8/1/06, none none <lots.of.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> (%i1) assume(a > b);
> (%o1) [a > b]
> (%i3) max(a, b - 5);
> (%o3) max(b - 5, a)
>
> Surely maxima is able to see that 'max(b - 5, a)' is always 'a'?
>
>