From help-octave-request at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu Fri Jun 5 08:58:32 1998 Subject: toc/C++/symbolic math From: Daniel Heiserer To: "help-octave at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu" Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 15:55:12 +0200 Even if nobody asked me for, I contribute my opinion too. I think octave should stay like it is, a convention of well maintained high-end-routines succesfully put together and having a as far as possible and as far it makes sense compatibility to a far distributed and excellent tool like matlab. 1) sparse matrices. I know it has a high priority on jwe's list, but I miss it a lot. I am doing FEM and I handle big matrices. Without the sparse formulation (like in matlab) I am a dead man. I am looking forward for a solution. 2) 'symbolic math'. I think I initiated the discussion, so let me say a few words about it. I think it is not necessay to include it full in the code itself. But why don't make some IPC crap to exchange these stupid strings between octave and a free symbolic-math programm. If somebody hasn't got the 80$ to buy 64MB to run both jobs, he needn't invoke the symbolic-math-package. 3) where can I find this "maxima" 4) toc returns integers. I would like to have more digits for benchmarks. How can i achieve them? PS: unluckily I am not very experienced in C++, but perhaps I can help a little bit, I try -- mfg Daniel Heiserer -------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Heiserer, BMW AG, Knorrstrasse 147, 80788 Muenchen Abteilung EK-20 Tel.: 089-382-21187, Fax.: 089-382-42820 mailto:daniel dot heiserer at bmw dot de