Hi!. I'm Scasbyte. I have been using Maple 11.0 for not too much time, I have found that after 2 or 3 hour of usage, it becomes amazingly slow, when I look an usage of the RAM memory it uses about 800 Mb and starts using Virtual Memory. Even if I restart maple(using the command "restart;" it still slow, I have to close Maple and open it again to solve this! Do you have the same problem?? What can I do to solve this?? Thanks!.

Earlier today, I was re-reading an old post when I was inspired. The post asked how one could use typesetting rules to make the call of a procedure typeset as a binary operation. The example used in the post was something along the lines of: myproc(a,b); becomes a <symbol> b; Inspired by a response to that post, I started looking at the help page for the define command and doing some testing in Maple. I was ready to make a reply to that post, when I stumbled upon a mind-boggling error. In the time it's taken me to track down that error (and run various errands), the original post has vanished from my view. Perhaps it still exists somewhere, but for the life of me, I cannot find it; therefore, I post to the next most appropriate place to describe and discuss this shortcoming: This blog.

This works in Maple 10, but fails (see below) in Maple 11...

> pp := -exp(x)+kk[1]*log(x)+kk[2]*x+kk[3]*log(log(x))+kk[4]*exp(x);

> vv := {kk[1], kk[2], kk[3], kk[4]};

I have some background in computer science; which may help explain my interest in Maple. :) In my Computer Science studies; one thing we were required to do was to minimize boolean expressions. I found this to be extremely tedious; something that you really want the computer to do for you. At least; that is how I saw it. So, I always thought that I would write a program to do; what we were doing manually. The result is the following application: Minimize Boolean Expression Worksheet

is(f@(g@h) = (f@g)@h); true is(f@(g@g)=(f@g)@g); false In the first, both sides come out as `@`(f,g,h) In the second, we get `@`(f,`@@`(g,2)) and `@`(f,g,g) which no longer match for "is"

As a relatively new Maple user I've ran into the message that the linalg package is superceded by the LinearAlgebra Package many times in the help pages. However, after using many older titles that used relatively older versions of Maple to demonstrate applications, I've sometimes found many of the linalg packages very intuitive and user friendly in cases where the LinearAlgebra operation may have created a little confusion. This blog entry is just my plea to Maplesoft to...

Is it intended that addition and multiplication act differently here?

> A := proc(s)
if type(s,`numeric`) then return true; fi;
return false;
end:

> A(2);

> A(a);

Here's a tip for people new to Maple or to 2-D input: always use a space for implied multiplication. 2-D math input in Maple allows for implicit multiplication, which is writing a multiplication operation without an explicit multiplication operator. An example is x y. The space is not always required in cases where there is no ambiguity. However, it is highly recommended that you include it. An example that catches many new users (and some experienced ones as well) is s(t+u). This does not mean s times t+u, but the function s applied to t+u

"I've seen this element before..." Often we are faced with the problem of building up sets incrementally, by removing pieces one at a time from a larger whole. The bottlenecks in this case are usually: 1) adding a small set X to a large set S (copies S and X, making this ~O(|S|+|X|)) 2) removing elements of the large set S from the small set X (binary search: |X|*log(|S|)) A classic example of this is a breadth-first-search. We start at one vertex of a graph and in each iteration we add the set of new neighbors X to the set of vertices S that have already been found. We can make this more useful by making the program return the sets of new neighbors found in each iteration, that is, the sets of vertices that are distance 1, 2, 3, etc. from the initial vertex.

Which of these do you prefer, and why?

foo := proc(T)

...

if type(s,`+`) then
r := map(foo,s);
fi;

...

end;

foo := proc(T)

...

if type(s,`+`) then
r := 0;
for x in op(s) do r := r+foo(x); od;
fi;

...

end;

The error message "too many levels of recursion" is sometimes misleading. In the problem below, the error source was an undefined list variable. This hint may help to find programming errors.

In this example, look at E1. Is it E2 or E3? We cannot tell from the way Maple displays them. For the answer, keep reading. Shouldn't Maple put parentheses or something in its rendering of E2 at least?

> E1 := f @ log @@ 4;

> E2 := (f @ log) @@ 4;

MaplePrimes seems to have a problem with <maple> tags for modules. When I wrap the tags around Statistics:-ErrorPlot(a,b) the “Statistics:-” gets elided.

One issue that often confuses users is local versus global optimization in Maple. I'm just going to give an overview here and will explore specific optimization topics more deeply in future blog entries. Please note that I'm covering only the numeric optimization methods here. I'll leave discussion of the exact methods in Maple to others more knowledgeable about those areas.

The Optimization package is built into Maple and is available to all users. This is primarily...

I am running Maple under Windows XP Pro, SP2. A couple week ago, I upgraded from Maple 11.0 to Maple 11.01. Everything went fine. According to Help>About, I had the version from June 8 2007, Build ID 296069. Just now, when I started Maple, there was a pop-up notice telling me that there was a newer version of Maple available. So I downloaded and installed the new version. According to Help>About, I now have the version from July 10 2007, Build ID 303882. There seems, though, to be an inconsistency: kernelopts(version) says     Maple 11.01, IBM INTEL NT, Jun 8 2007 Build ID 296069