Re: Computer Algebra Algorithms lisp vs. C. BENCHMARKS?

I don't understand why, when given the chance to prove your point you look for excuses. That usually tells folks that we are hearing (reading) a faith-based opinion rather than a data-based opinion. The proposed benchmarks are relatively simple and code probably available. When you want a more complex benchmark, it seems to me that you want to include things that have little relevance to your expressed concern. Adding things like GUI and other bit-twiddling code to a CAS benchmark is usually not done anyway.

bernard parisse wrote:

Richard Fateman wrote:

bernard parisse wrote:



A more complex task would be more interesting, for example
comparing existing code 



I disagree.  At some level, even the least competent programming
language will allow you to add two polynomials by something
quite small, e.g.
 A+B or   polyadd(A,B)   or  (Add A B),
and so nothing much will be demonstrated by one or by many of
such calls.



What is the aim of a CAS library for you?
For me it is that the user can choose the
best data structure and algorithms.
For example a complete CAS library will provide a
type for several kind of polynomials (dense, sparse, recursive,
distributed) and the user should have a function to make polynomial
operations, he will concentrate on the new functions he is coding.
Of course, he expects that the CAS library will implement these
operations the best possible way. That's why I suggested benchmarks
on relatively more complex tasks such as gcd or factorization
(to see if the library has a good implementation of "basic" services)
or tasks that would be traditionnaly programmed inside the CAS
user language (because that's what a CAS user will do).

factorization code, 


parts of Maxima's factorization code were, at least at one
time, written in C.


Do you mean polynomial factorization? Or integer factorization? 
.