Richard Fateman <fateman at eecs.berkeley.edu> writes:
> On 1/26/2012 10:29 PM, Robert Dodier wrote:
>> On 1/26/12, Rupert Swarbrick<rswarbrick at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=1204711&group_id=4933&atid=104933
>
> If you want to retract a particular simp rule among a whole bunch, I
> suggest you keep a list of your rules and assert via tellsimp,
> etc. when you want them to operate. When you want to remove one, kill
> them all. Then edit the list of rules, and re-assert them.
>
> That way you don't have to change any of the system code.
> It is unlikely that you are going to be faster than the current
> method, though you might be insignificantly slower. At least
> if your computation is in fact the same one. Which it might not
> be.
>
> RJF
Right. I'm not sure if you've actually read my message? Or maybe I
wasn't clear.
At the moment, tellsimp/tellsimpafter and remrule interact weirdly. The
reason for this is (I presume) a performance hack. My first try to fix
this works by removing the hacky method and replacing it with something
sane. It appears to work at least as fast, or faster.
I'm aware that I can work around bugs, but that's an... unusual
approach. Are you saying that I should not expect Maxima to have sane
semantics with defrule and friends? Or do you think that I was trying to
write this to improve performance? Or have I misunderstood you?
Rupert
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/attachments/20120127/b14a3a3a/attachment.pgp>;