Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Computer Algebra Systems
timdaly writes "A while back Slashdot had an article decrying
the lack of a good open source computer algebra
system. That is changing. There is a
conference scheduled for the end of May to define the development model and strategy for future work. Students of math, science and engineering will find this valuable. If you're tired of hacking open source editors and want something with a real technical challenge this is the area for you."
Is it just me, or do committee-based open source projects that aren't funded fail?
maybe i'm not understanding it properly, but will this be a large maths library? if so what will it include exactly?"
Well, though it stands for GiNaC is Not a CAS (Computer Algebre System). GiNaC, which is a library for advanced symbolic calculations certainly would make a fine backend for a CAS. It's a pretty powerful tool wainging for an interface.
A computer algebra system which is built in a bazaar is a Bad Idea.
With an operating system, it isn't all that critical if it crashes occasionally. Ok, it's a nuisance... but it won't go unnoticed, and someone will track down why it's crashing, and it will get fixed.
Computer algebra systems are rather more prone to undiscovered errors. It's very easy, for example, to write a long integer multiplication routine which works perfectly for integers less than 2^20 digits long, but starts to fail (deterministically, but without obvious pattern) for very rare inputs above that size. In a bazaar, where code is accepted from anyone, you're very likely to see this sort of buggy code get introduced.
With a closed (commercial) or pseudo-closed (not necessarily commercial, but within a university where everyone has scrutinized each other's credentials) environment, such errors are far less likely to exist. Computational mathematicians are paranoid about such errors; computational mathematicians will not introduce a piece of code unless they can *prove* that it will work.
Given enough eyes, all detected bugs will be fixed; but actually detecting those bugs in the first place is far from certain.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
For more info check out: http://maxima.sourceforge.net
I've used it for some basic things, and it seems to be quite powerful. Not as full-featured as MAPLE or Mathematica, but covers most of the common needs for a CAS.
I have a collection of self-built RPMS for mathematics packages to try out if you like. Included are: drgenius, gap, geomview, gtkmathview, Macaulay2, maxima (a minor pain 'cause it depends on lisp), and others available at http://www.math.unl.edu/~rdieter. Enjoy.
I read the GiNac paper posted at the link.
Aldor (www.aldor.org) is a language that goes
well beyond the GiNaC language. It offers Types
as first-class objects (you can store them and
manipulate them), symbolic as well as numeric
evaluation, interpretation and compilation.
Frankly, though I'm certain to be flamed for this,
I find that doing computer algebra in C++ about
like doing division in roman numerals. It is
possible to do but it is the wrong notation and
notation is vital to thinking correctly (and
programming correctly). The closer a language's
syntax and semantics approaches to the problem
domain the fewer chances there are of mistakes.
Yes, both GAP and Axiom have well-founded math
models at their heart. They started out symbolic.
I do not expect anyone to change religions, umm,
systems. But we all need to discuss things like
MathML, common user interfaces, common graphics,
etc. that are not at the heart of the systems
and can benefit every system. As to common
tests I found it very worthwhile to test one
system by trying others. The tests highlight
interesting questions such as how and when to
factor results. I'd also like to see all of the
free packages available on one CD packaged so
they could all be run without installation.
I think they call it "FORTRAN", or something like that...
(yes, it's a joke)
LISP and Prolog anyone?
python >>>
reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,map(lambda x:chr(ord(x)^42),tuple('zS^BED\nX_FOY\x0b')))
There is a great computer algebra system available under the GPL RIGHT NOW. It's the mother-of-all computer algebra systems, in fact, and is very mature and stable See Maxima
For anyone interested in free computer algebra systems, I would like to point to GNU TeXmacs, whose version 1.0 has just been released. This program can be used as a frontend for most free computer algebra systems. Please contact us if you want to help us supporting other systems or improving the current interfaces (or adding interfaces to other scientific computation systems).
We plan to write a compiler for a new computer algebra system called mathemagix. We are searching potential contributors or people who would just like to give us some useful suggestions; the development is still in a very early stage due to my work on TeXmacs.
Correct address: http://www.mathemagix.org/
Still, people have learned quite a bit about algorithms, software engineering, and software reuse since Macsyma, Maple, and Mathematica were originally implemented, and it might well be worth thinking about having another go at a modern computer algebra system. I suspect that implementing it in something like ML or Haskell might help a lot with correctness and extensibility.
... had a patch accepted into gcc?
I've never seen any open source project that "accepts contributions from anyone". They all have gatekeepers.
Interestingly, the gatekeepers on major open source projects such as gcc tend to be much more critical than the gatekeepers on a commercial closed-source project. Almost all of the commercial closed-source projects that I've worked on, or seen, have zero gatekeeping once you're hired. Contrast this with the review process for gcc, where senior developers routinely have their submissions returned for more development.