@Markiyan Hirnyk 

In order to be prefectly clear, should I have mention that before using SetEdgeWeight I had used MakeWeighted ?

# G = some unweighted graph
WG := MakeWeighted(G)   # gives weights 1 to all edges in G
# link = some edge in WG
SetEdgeWeight(WG, link, infinity) # does not work

Is this sufficiently accurate for you ?

I thank you again for your first answer, all the rest is a waste of time
 

@Markiyan Hirnyk 

As I had already constructed an unweighted graph (not from its adjacency matrix), I found using the procedure  SetEdgeWeight was a simple and fast way go introduce weights.
But it does accept only numeric values as written in the Maple 2015' help pages (I did not try with Maple 2016)

It is unfortunate that MakeWeighted and SetEdgeWeight do not accept the same objects ...

Nevertheless I thank you for your useful solution

@acer 

Acer,
sorry to ask you again

I used your proposal but I keep having some troubles.
I think I should have been more precise in my request.

I am concerned by code regression testing.
The target code builds and solves ODE systems and I need to guarantee that successive releases do not degrade results obtained from a reference version.
When doing this with a Fortran or C code, you generally compare numerical results (arrays of floating point numbers).
My idea is to do regression testing on more “primitive” objects ; for instance the procedure dsolve(…, numeric) produces. However this requires the regression testing framework I use (based on Scala) is capable to “read” this primitive object.
So hoped something like

F := dsolve({diff(x(t)=t, t), numeric)
writeto(MyFile)     # some .txt file
showstat(F)

would work, but it does not.

Your proposal :

only writes  proc(rkf_45)  … end proc in the target file

@acer 

Great thanks to you acer for all those fruitful informations.

Thanks to you too @DSkoog 

@vv  At the very end, every user must be aware that rhe rules used by Maple do not necessarily fit his own culture or the rules used elsewhere, and that he must be very carefull with what maple returns.

Thanks for this interesting exchange

@Markiyan Hirnyk 

The value you obtain equals (2/3)*(1/3), which corresponds to the [def 2] of my previous comment (observation of a success after N=1 failures)

Point 1:
There exist two definitions of the Geometric distribution

1. [def 1]  "N-1 failures followed by a success"
2. [def 2]  "N failures followed by a success".

With p (probability of success) equal to 1/3 :

1. [def 1]  gives (2/3)^4 * (1/3) = 16 / 729
2. [def 2] gives (2/3)^5 * (1/3) = (32 / 729) * (1/3)

Redardless to the definition, the result "(32 / 729)" seems wrong.
But the result is not 0 neither

Point 2:
As you said, the value of the argument "N" must be an integer : a correct implementation should return an error if the number N of failures is not a POSITIVE INTEGER.
I thing you put your finger on the issue I am often railing against : Maple does not implement discrete distributions in a rigourous way and works on floationg points instead on integers.

@Carl Love 
Hi Carl,

Why did you not suggest to use  Statistics:-Sample(Uniform(-r, r), N) ?
Is it due to a reason of efficiency ?
Maybe RandomTools:-Generate is "lighter" than Statistics:-Sample in terms of memory size ?

Thank you for your answer

@Carl Love 

These double quotes is really a thing I do not master.

Thank you a lot
 

@Carl Love 

Thanks for this very clear position of yours.

My "should I suppress ?" question was motivated by the fact that the pseudo-solution I found looked more to tinkerink than to serious job.
The thing that bothered me in "suppressing"  was that someone (you) had already taken the trouble to make a response : obviously It would have been unsmart to delete the question without refering to you.
Thus my "I propose to suppress myself my question"  was an implicit request for your position.

Your answer is perfectly clear, the question will remain.

Thanks for this interesting exchange

@Carl Love 

Thanks Carl.

Probably I expressed myself poorly : I know that ?dsolve,numeric opens an help page where I can read the name of all the methods, but what  I was asking for was "does it exist a variable of type list (for instance), somewhere in the MAPLE librairies, which conains all these names and that I could retrieuse ?
Otherwise I have to construct this list manually (ok this one is not too long).
But look to the options of the methods (rkf45 has 27 options for example).



In fact I was coming back on Mapleprimes to suppress this question for I have found some tricks to retrieve the desired informations
For instance :  dsolve(..., numeric, method = bob)
returns an error messsage which contains the list of all the known methods : it is then a very simple thing to copy/paste this message in any text file and keep only the list of the names.
Likewise dsolve(..., numeric, method = rkf45, alice=bob) returns an error message which contains the list of all the avaliable options of method rkf45.
After some tens of minutes I had recovered all the informations I was looking for.

Concerning the dsolve[interactive]() pane it was a little bit longer, but the maplet builder assistant helped me a lot.


I propose to suppress myself my question , is it a common practice here ?


Sorry for the inconvenience

@Carl Love Thanks for those precisions

@tomleslie 
@Carl Love

I spoke too quickly : if G is a directed graph, DrawGraph(G, style=planar) returns an error in Maple 2016 ... excepted in very simple cases

DrawGraph(Graph({[a, b], [b,c], [c, a]}), style=planar)          #works
DrawGraph(Graph({[a, x], [a,y], [b,x], [b,y]}), style=planar)  #does not work

In the few textbooks about graph theory I read, I did not found any specification that planarity is restricted to undirected graphs only.
But I am not sure of that ???

@tomleslie 
@Carl Love 

I finally succedeed in solving my problem.
The key idea (this is the mountain of the title) is to add a dimension to the polygons in order to generate a 3D plot (I use nox PLOT3D(....) instead of PLOT) and to oriente the drawing to obtain the desired flat representation.

As Carl wrote,PLOT places CURVES in front of POLYGONS, but PLOT3D is less strict (there is also a STYLE(HIDDEN) option that authorizes some variants)


Whilst waiting for a simpler solution I should nevertheless like to thank you for your comments



AUXILIARY QUESTION :
In Maple 2015.2 DrawGraph(G, style=planar) returns an error if G is a directed graph.
I just checked the same command performs well in Maple 2016 : was it an error in Maple 2015.2 or is it an evolution of Maple 2016 ?

@Carl Love 

I am now at the office (sand15athome) and I  just see some errors in my previous response (I wrote it in a hurry).
I apologize for this and send you something fairer

____________________________________________________________________________________

Thank you Carl.
I suspected Maple used some ranking based on the dimension (point, line, surface) of the structures to plot.
But I had some hope that a bypass could exist.
The reason is :

1 : DrawGraph displays edges only "outside" the rectangles that represent the vertices of the graph

2 : plottools:-getdata(DrawGraph(...)) returns a list of polygons where some correspond to edges from a point A to a point B while others are rectangles centered at points A and B.
So, "materially", the edges are really from A to B but they are hidden by theses rectangles ... so I suspected those last where placed in the foreground. ... hence my question