Product Suggestions

Post your suggestions on new features and products.

Let us consider

plots:-inequal(max(1, min(x, 2))+max(1, min(y, 2)) <= 3, x = -4 .. 4, y = -4 .. 4);


and compare it with

plots:-implicitplot(max(1, min(x, 2))+max(1, min(y, 2)) = 3, x = -4 .. 4, y = -4 .. 4, gridrefine = 2);

The latter plot must be a subset of the former plot, but it isn't so. bug_in_inequal.mw

Hello,

At the moment there is no support on GitHub for language recognition and syntax highlighting for Maple. I think better support for Maple on GitHub would be a good thing:

  1. It makes Maple more recognizable, for example in language searches such as this one for one of its competitors.
     
  2. The list of currently supported languages is long and even contains many obscure entries. Maple is not obscure and deserves to be there.

So, why am I posting this here, as it concerns GitHub more than Maple? The reason is that adding support for new languages is often done by GitHub users themselves, using the Linguist library mentioned on this help page. The process does not seem very difficult to me, but it requires a few careful steps.

Referring to those steps:

  1. I think it would be nice to add support for the extensions , and .
     
  2. Perhaps this project by @Daniel Skoog could be used for syntax highlighting? However, currently it does not have a license.
     
  3. Does anybody know of a body of Maple source code that is representative of the modern Maple language as a whole? Probably it should be available under a permissive open source license such as MIT or BSD. (I am not sure whether GPLed work would qualify.)
     
  4. I know of a few Maple projects by others that are maintained on GitHub, such as the ParametricMatrixTools package and some packages by Daniel Skoog. If there are other Maple projects being maintained on GitHub, it would be good to know about them in the comments.

So, in summary, could you perhaps help me with the above Steps 2, 3 and 5 or, if you prefer, could you take care of them yourself and open a pull request, so Maple on GitHub can literally get the recognition it deserves?

My best wishes,

Sebastiaan Janssens.

 

There are many questions that complain about Latex conversion in Maple.

I'd like to again request that Maplesoft improves Latex output of its expressions. If Maple can just fix how it generates fractions, that will good enough for now.

I am willing to send Maplesoft a personal check of the amount of one month salary for one of your developers to do this fix if you are willing to do it. It should not take more than one month to do this simple fix in your code. It might even take one day if someone knows the code.

The problem comes when there is a fraction in the expression. the Latex output instead of using proper latex code using "\frac{}{}", it instead uses "/" which makes the output terrible.

Another case, where Maple generate (expression)^{-1} instead of \frac{1}{expression}.

It can't be that hard to fix these 2 issues, which can go a long way towards making the latex generated by Maple much better. Here is an example

eq:=-(1/2)*1/y = (1/3)*x^3+z:
sol:=solve(eq,y);

latex(sol);
-3/2\, \left( {x}^{3}+3\,z \right) ^{-1}

Which renders as

Which is terrible. The screen output is much better.

Compare this to Mathematica

eq = -(1/2)*(1/y) == (1/3)*x^3 + z;
sol = y /. First@Solve[eq, y];
TeXForm[sol]

   -\frac{3}{2 \left(x^3+3 z\right)}

Which renders in Latex as

If Maplesoft does not think Latex is improtant, then they are completely wrong. CAS support in Latex is very important. Ignoring Latex means you will lose customers who want good Latex support of the math output of Maple. After all, Math and Latex go togother. And Maple is supposed to be all about Mathematics.

Any chance of Maplesoft taking some time to fix these issues in Latex? Maple has not had any improvement in Latex for years and years. I keep buying Maple each year, and nothing changes in its Latex export.

thank you

In as much as the embedded component suite is a brilliant tool for the custom design of online educational programs, student tests, etc, my purposes are orientated around encouraging and assisting of self directed investigation, with the utilization of the packages of maple, but in a manner that allows the user to neglect the requirement to have any knowledge of maple code itself, allowing them to focus entirely on their discipline of choice. 

So because the content the user will enter into the interface I am designing is naturally going to be quite variant from individual to individual, one of the  necessary properties that does not exist is for the math containers to have the option of being resizeable at the discretion of the user.

At the moment, I have added buttons that allow the user to resize the window by pressing one of four buttons entitled "increase height". "decrease height", "increase width" and "decrease height". This will suffice for my first working prototype but i just feel that it would be much neater if it were possible to resize the math component directly, and some option of the neighbouring embedded components to either shift their position accordingly, or maintain rectilinear alignment with the greater proportion of other components by all embedded components shifting accordingly when one math container is resized.

 

The Maple splash screen needs a makeover, it's not too exciting so looking at the maplesoft website the opening screen has an image that would have been rather fitting for the Maple 2018 splash screen.  Here's the image I'm talking about.

Please take a look at the attached document, a partial design for a power supply I'm working on.  I find I am spending a lot of time reformatting results with units to look as nice as what you see here.  For every result, I need to do Units Formatting, change to a sensible unit like uH instead of 10^-6 H, and then do Numeric Formatting to change the number to show just three significant digits.  That requires from 0 to 2 decimals, in fixed point.

This is the way engineering documents should look.  You want to see a fixed point number from 1.00 to 999, with a certain number of significant digits (not decimal points), and have the unit scaled accordingly.  You want to see 12.3 uA, not 1.23402 x 10^-5 A.

I would like to see Maple add "N significant digits" to its Numeric Formatting options and auto-scale results with units to the appropriate multiplier.  If I could set that as my default result formatting it would save a huge amount of work.  Often as a design progresses the multiplier will change, also.  A result may initially come out in mA but later change to uA.  Not only do I have to do them all manually now, but I have to go back and change them.  Automating all that would be a great help.

(You may also notice that my vector results with units are not scaled like I describe here.  If anyone can tell me how to do that I would appreciate it.  Otherwise, it looks like a bug to me.)

Example_Document.zip

Irrational numbers: numbers that cannot be represented as a ratio of integers. The decimal form of a rational number is non-repeating and non-terminating.

Change to:

Irrational numbers: numbers that cannot be represented as a ratio of integers. The decimal form of an irrational number is non-repeating and non-terminating. 

or change to

Irrational numbers can be represented by decimal fractions in which the digits go on forever without ever repeating a pattern.  See Downing, Douglas. Dictionary of Mathematics Terms. 2nd ed. Hauppauge, NY: Barron's Ed. Series, Inc., 1995, p. 176).

Let us consider

sol1 := dsolve({diff(y(x), x) = solve((1/2)*(diff(y(x), x))^2 = (1-ln(y(x)^2))*y(x)^2, diff(y(x), x))[1], 
y(0) = 1}, numeric);
sol1 := proc(x_rkf45) ... end proc

The problem under consideration has the symbolic solution:

sol2 := dsolve({diff(y(x), x) = solve((1/2)*(diff(y(x), x))^2 = (1-ln(y(x)^2))*y(x)^2, diff(y(x), x))[1], 
y(0) = 1});

sol2 := y(x) = exp(x*sqrt(2)-x^2)

Let us compare the plots of sol1 and sol2 (which should coincide):

A := plots:-odeplot(sol1, x = 0 .. 1, color = navy, style = point):
B := plot(rhs(sol2), x = 0 .. 1, color = red):
plots:-display([A, B]);

The plots differ after approximately 0.707. Bug_in_dsolve_numeric.mw

Edit. The title and one of the tags.

I submit a bug through MaplePrimes because I can't do it as usually (Hope some people understand me.). Let us consider

with(LinearAlgebra):
M := Matrix(5, 5,  (i, j) -> (10*i+j)*sin((1/180)*Pi*(10*i+j))):
MatrixInverse(M);
 #One sees a long and wrong output instead of the warning "Matrix M is singular"

Indeed,

Digits := 500; evalf(Determinant(M), 495);
                               
                           1.3 10 ^(-488)   

Bug_in_MatrixInverse.mw

I submit a bug through MaplePrimes because I can't do it as usually (Hope some people understand me.). Let us consider

restart; pdsolve([diff(u(t, x), t, t) = diff(u(t, x), x, x), u(t, 0) = 0, u(t, Pi) = 0]);
pdsolve([diff(u(t, x), t, t) = diff(u(t, x), x, x), u(t, 0) = 0, u(t, Pi) = 0], generalsolution);
u(t, x) = Sum(sin(n*x)*(_C5(n)*cos(n*t)+_C1(n)*sin(n*t)), n = 1 .. infinity)
u(t, x) = Sum(sin(n*x)*(_C5(n)*cos(n*t)+_C1(n)*sin(n*t)), n = 1 .. infinity)

The question arises: what do these outputs mean? I don't see any explanation in ?pdsolve and ?examples,pdsolve_boundaryconditions. What are _C1(n) and _C5(n)? Under which conditions does the above series converge?

Moreover,

pdetest(%, [diff(u(t, x), t, t) = diff(u(t, x), x, x), u(t, 0) = 0, u(t, Pi) = 0]);
                           [0, 0, 0]

I think the above is simply a fake: it is possible to differentiate  a series only under certain conditions.

Bug_in_pdsolve.mw

Please, don't convert my post to a question. This is not correct and fair. Hope some people understand me.

Hello,

I often use in Maple the plot preview, but any time when i launch the plot preview, i must set the zoom factor to 100% to see all content of the document and further i have to maximize theplot-view window.

It is very uncomfortable to use the plot preview.

This should be fixed with the next upgrades of Maple.

See here the effect, when launching the plot previewer:

Thanks in advance

Volker

 

 

I'd like to present the following bugs in the IntTutor command.

1. Initialize

Student[Calculus1]:-IntTutor((1+cos(3*x))^(3/2), x);

then press the All Steps button. The command produces the answer (see Bug1_in_IntTutor.mw)

(4/9)*sqrt(2)*sin((3/2)*x)^3-(4/3)*sqrt(2)*sin((3/2)*x)

which is not correct in view of

plot(diff((4/9)*sqrt(2)*sin((3/2)*x)^3-(4/3)*sqrt(2)*sin((3/2)*x), x)-(1+cos(3*x))^(3/2), x = 0 .. .2);

One may compare it with the Mathematica result Step-by-step2.pdf.

2. Initialize

Student[Calculus1]:-IntTutor(cos(x)^2/(1+tan(x)), x);

In the window press the Next Step button. This crashes (The kernel connection has been lost) my comp in approximately an half of hour (see screen2.docx). One may compare it with the Mathematica result Step-by-step.pdf .

Indeed,  "We wanted the best, but it turned out like always" .

It seems a large number of people, when initially using maple, wrongly deduce that for example sin(60) is the sin of 60 degrees and not the sin of 1/3 Pi radians.  I believe mathematica's default is degrees.  When a student compares an expression to another but forgets to realize a value is read as radians and not degrees they are perplexed when Maple returns false and Mathematica returns true.

As a suggestion, under tools->options allow a user to be able to change how maple reads values within trigonometric funtions as either radians or degrees.

Most times when someone computes the sin(60) what they really mean in Maple..
is sin(convert(60 degrees, radians))

 

The purpose of this post is to review how well-designed Maple 2017 GUI is for a Microsoft surface pro 4 tablet touch screen with windows 10 pro (64-bit) and to determine the performance of Maple 2017 on my tablet which has a m3 CPU with a 0.9 GHZ base frequency and 4 GB RAM.

First, my experience is that 4 GB of RAM is far from enough. Under heavy load I have had problems before on other software with 4 GB of RAM. 68 % of my RAM and 41% of the CPU is already gone by simply running Maple and my web browser at the same time before I have even instructed Maple to do any calculations.

 

I think a tablet with at least 8 GB of RAM would be preferred. If you only want to use Maple as an expensive calculator then you would most likely not even need 4 GB of RAM. I find that the surface pro 4 to be overpriced for the hardware it provides. I think eve windows 10 tablet http://eve-tech.com/ with up to 16 GB of RAM and with a much cheaper price looks much more promising than the Microsoft surface pro 4. When I use the surface pro 4 with word 2016 and the reference manager zotero word plugin I sometime notice a trailing line when I sweep up or down in a document with a lot of references which I suspect is because of the low amount of RAM. When I played with Maple 2017 on my surface pro I noticed the same trailing line which again indicates to me that there is not enough RAM. However, I am not certain that low RAM is the cause of such problem.  

Secondly, I managed to increase the size of the Maple icons under the File, Edit etc. menu so now they have a perfect size for a touch screen tablet. Very cool!

 

However, as you can see words in the text menu File, Edit etc. are way too small for a touch screen tablet. There is a lot of room to the right so the words could easily be increased in size. I am also a missing a menu item called maplet where you can attach your own maplets for easy access. It appears that Maple 2017 GUI has not been designed with a touch screen tablet in mind. I wish the words in the text menu File, Edit etc. would have increased when I increased the size of the icons. The text and icons in the sidebar are also way too small for a touch screen tablet. The name of the open tabs is also to small and x that you tap on to close the worksheet is also to small. It is almost impossible to close a worksheet because the x is so small. 

I thinks there are ways in windows 10 to increase the text size in the menus but I have only been able to increase the text size and icon size for all software at the same time. Since, Maple is more or less the only software that I have where the menu text is too small this is not an optimal solution.   

The table of content for Maple help files also has too small text as seen in the below picture. However, the biggest problem is not the small words it is the row spacing of the table of content. Some of the words appear almost to be on top of each other. I think the row spacing need to be increased. The text within the help files itself displays beautifully and is in the perfect size.   

 

Another problem is that when you swipe up or down on the touch screen you dont go up or down in the maple document. You just highlight text as seen in the picture below. This needs to be fixed. Highlighting should be done by a long tap on the screen as in word 2017 on a touch screen devices.

 

 

The norm today might be to use Maple on a desktop computer or on a laptop but I am convinced that in the future touch screen tablet will become more and more powerful making them an excellent computers to run Maple on because they are so light and portable. I think Maplesoft must have this in mind when they design the GUI.

Now to test the performance of Maple 2017 on my tablet I decided to generate 1 000 000 random number and see how long it takes. Since I dont have a benchmark it becomes very hard to comment on how fast maple 2017 is on my tablet but I am hoping that someone can run the same code on their machine and comment on this post so we can get a benchmark.        

time(rand()$1000000)

Maple 2017 claims that running such code took about 50 seconds on my tablet however when I timed it with a stop watch it only took around 30 seconds hence I am a bit confused as to where the 20 seconds difference comes from?  

 

I am thinking about buying maple 2017 however there are only 4 different categories to choose from when you want to buy: student, commercial, academic and government. I dont belong to any of them! Also the price difference is huge! I am on disability benefits and the academic license cost more or less the same amount that I get in disability benifts each month to cover my food, rent and medicines which is approximatly 1 100 usd. The price for a student licens is completely realistic and is a price that I am willing to pay but I am not a student and I dont feel comfortable claiming that I am even though everyone is a student as long as they live. When you stop learning you life is more or less over anyway. If I am forced to pay around 1 000 usd then I am not going to buy maple 2017. Then I am just going to continue using MathPapa free algbra calculator https://www.mathpapa.com/ because to be honest I dont really need maple that much in my research today but there are a couple of reaons why I want to buy. 1) I would like to support maplesoft because I think you have the best and most userfriendly mathematical software on the market. 2) I want to hedge my bets. My needs might change in the future. 3) I want to be able to run my large number of old worksheets and see if I can improve them. 4) I want to see what changes and improvments have been made to maple 2017 compared to let say 5 years ago and to assess if these changes provide any value to me. 

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Last Page 4 of 23