Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Open Source Symbolic Math Packages?

Posted by Cliff on from the here-we-go-again dept.

3Suns asks: "There are many proprietary symbolic mathematics suites available, including Mathcad, Mathematica, and Maple. Strangely, I can't find a single free software project with similar functionality. These programs are as ubiquitous in universities and engineering companies as they are expensive. Given the deep roots of open-source in higher education, what can explain the lack of free/open-source mathematics software?" We last addressed this question three years ago, but a lot can change in that time. Has it?

5 of 46 comments (clear)

  1. It is *because* of the ubiquity... by Joseph+Vigneau · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact that most universities and engineering copmanies have these packages readily available is probably why a big reason why open source alternatives have not shown up. The people who usually write this type of software are academics- who already have access, and don't have the itch to scratch.

    1. Re:It is *because* of the ubiquity... by jabberjaw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Depending on what you want to do, there are some highly specialized, hardcore symbolic programs which make Maple, Mathematica, and Mathcad seem like toys.
      Like what? Seriously, where can I find them? I will most likely be too much to a novice to make use of them, but they would be interesting to see and I am sure I am not alone in this. Also, why are not some of the features that are present in these high-performance programs incorporated into commercial apps. such as Mathematica and Maple? Perhaps Wolfram's ego would be bruised by using other code?

  2. Re:Please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wow, what year is it? People still don't understand open source software?

    Well, here's how it would work. People don't write open source software for OTHER PEOPLE, they write it for themselves.

    Somebody needs symbolic math package, but doesn't want to pay for the expensive versions. Unlike yourself, he reasons that like any complex system, a symbolic math package can be broken down into simpler subsets that maybe he can write himself.

    Or maybe, he just wants to try writing it.

    Or maybe he reads your post and considers it a challenge.

    After a while, he gets it working and it solves his particular problem. Then he puts it on his web site and waits for open source magic to take over. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. But it doesn't cost him anything to try, after all, he's already solved his particular problem.

    And that boys and girls, is how open source software is born.

  3. Re:Please explain by larry+bagina · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Operating systems are also very well understood. Every CS undergraduate takes a course or 2 on operating system design and there are dozens to hundreds of books on unix/OS design and internals.

    Read OSNews of KernelTrap sometime. There are also dozens of small OSes written by individuals in their spare time.

    How many books on writing programs to deal with symbolic math have you read lately?

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  4. A book on computer algebra by Humble+Star · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of the most thorough that I've seen is: Algorithms for Computer Algebra by K.O. Geddes, et. al. If you're not very good at modern algebra, don't bother shelling out the ~$270 for this book. (I got my copy for $80 used.) Geddess, et. al. are the ones who designed and wrote Maple.

    I might come as a surprise to some, but symbolic mathematical systems require a lot of advanced math! Finishing the college calculus sequence is about 3 years insufficient to start scratching the surface. So, there aren't many people who know the math and know how to write software. I think that's why Mathematica and Maple are so darn expensive. I think you'd need a bunch of graduate-level people to make up your QA team!