Re: big exponents in rational functions [Re: Yet another Maple regression bug, 2000--2007--? (trivial integral)]

On Jun 16, 8:40 pm, Vladimir Bondarenko <v...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 15, 12:26 pm, Daniel Lichtblau <d...@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:


VB> > In CAS, we need more freedom for the customers.

DL> This is an opinion I share, more or less.

A 10+ years Mathematica buff, I am pleased to
hear this, indeed.

DL> Though I am not certain we interpret the words
DL> in the same way.

I was wondering couldn't it be possible for you to
describe your viewpoint in more detail?

The use of math programs is widespread, at least if you count
calculators and spreadsheets. My opinion is the demand side (market
place, if you prefer) is served best, and the commercial & academic
supply sides also well served, if people should have choices. I
include amongst them open source and shareware along with commercial
software. My biggest concern is not that the commercial vendors or
frely available software will prevail, but rather that zealots of one
stripe or another will manage to fragment it in some hard-to fix way.
Okay, that's not likely to happen; it's just a worst case scenario. My
second worst concern is that people will actually take seriously what
they read about the topic on Usenet. Okay, that's also unlikely to
affect many people. I guess I must be care free.

I don't actually advocate a free-for-all. More of a meritocracy,
wherein noncommercial development might get e.g. NSF funding based on
quality of grant proposal and the like, and commercial vendors still
can have access to libraries whose development was publicly funded (I
mean things like Lapack).

This probably oversimplifies my views but frankly, as they speak for
but one individual, I don't see that it is terribly critical to drill
too deep here.


DL> I don't know the whereabouts of that army of
DL> customers,

They are around you and me reading our comments and
deciding how to proceed... to buy, or not to buy?

Maybe buy Matlab or MathCAD? Or Maple? Or Mathematica?

Well, certainly there are many people making decisions of that sort.
But I doubt more than a few dozen are readers of sci.math.symbolic.


Sales folks should extra clunk-clunk you for your
(instructive, detailed and helping) messages...

And here I thought they liked me for my mournful eyes...

Vladimir Bondarenko
Cyber Tester


Daniel Lichtblau
Wolfram Research

.

Loading