[Maxima] LAPACK with maxima
dan.stanger at ieee.org
Sat Dec 23 20:29:01 CST 2006
Instead of adding an interface to lapack, how about adding a interface
to octave, the matlab clone.
clisp already has an interface to matlab, so perhaps that could be
modified to work with octave.
sen1 at math.msu.edu wrote:
>Some comments from a user:
>This may be a longshot, but I would like maxima to be a free program
>with most of the "bells and whistles" of programs like Maple and Mathematica.
>The advantages for education and research are obvious. Also, the
>availability of the source code in a convenient place could help
>budding programmers and developers in writing new code.
>If it is possible to simply call up the LAPACK routines in maxima when
>one is needed, then please tell me how to do it. An example would be
>most welcome. For instance, how about an example which finds the
>top 10 eigenvalues (assuming all are non-zero) of a 50x50
>non-symmetric sparse matrix?
>In solving certain research problems, LAPACK is very useful. If one
>simply says that this or that implementation of maxima does not have
> (a) that sends a (potentially large user group) to other
> venues, or
> (b) one is forced to develop one's own code for this or that
> problem. This has to be done in many cases anyway, but it
> should not have to be done for standardized code such as the LAPACK
> routines. This is re-inventing the wheel, and a huge waste of
> time. Also, the code, even if contributed, would most likely
> have the optimization of that produced by experienced
>For those who have resources and experience with many types of
>languages (maybe even make a living in that) it is no problem to pull
>up this or that appropriate tool for this or that problem.
> But, most users don't get to that situation. They have specific
> problems and want solutions in a small set of packages.
>I think the modular aspect of maxima is good enough so that it does
>not have to become bloated. Packages can be loaded as needed. So, I
>put my vote in for the inclusion of LAPACK in the source, either as
>generic lisp code or as maxima packages.
>--Just my two-cents (or maybe half a cent).
>On Sat, 23 Dec 2006, Richard Fateman wrote:
>>I kind of disagree here.
>>Instead of inserting LAPACK source into the Maxima source, how about
>>pointing to a few binary forms, one for each plausible host environment,
>>with a suitable interface. Perhaps we could even point to matlisp, which
>>apparently solves the problem of the foreign function interface for cmucl
>>So what is needed is CLISP and GCL. Or just say that LAPACK is not available
>>for certain implementations. (The set of features of Maxima in my version
>>of Allegro CL is missing other pieces, like plotting; on the other hand, it
>>has voice output as an option. LAPACK need not be universal.)
>>If someone wants LAPACk for GCL, it would require coming up with suitable
>>interface code and suitable binary (.dll, .so, .lib ??). It seems to me that
>>this is a GCL project, suitable for someone to do who knows almost nothing
>>about maxima. Perhaps it should be a CFFI implementation for GCL.
>>There are many other programs in netlib that could potentially be of
>>interest to maxima users, and for someone on this list to speculate on what
>>is most useful and spend time converting or interfacing such a program --
>>without an application in mind -- seems to have the potential for a major
>>distraction. If the same person could, instead, figure out a way of
>>improving maxima in a way that is more nearly unique -- ie provides a
>>symbolic mathematical facility that is not available in netlib or any other
>>programming framework... or perhaps is only available in proprietary form in
>>Mathematica or Maple... that seems to me to be more productive.
>>If people are lacking in ideas of what symbolic facility might be possible,
>>there are items in this mailing list that have come up. Or alternatively,
>>just browse through the (Free, online) mathematica or maple documentation
>>and find something neat that maxima does not yet do. And either mimick the
>>design, or perhaps improve on it.
>>Or look at the potential project list for a class in algebraic manipulation
>>are posted near the end of this document...
>>My suggestion though: if you have no more math background than a year of
>>freshman calculus, your chance of making a thoughtful contribution will be
>>considerably lower than if you have a more sophisticated background in math.
>>This background can be obtained through studying some of the literature or
>>"the competition". While enthusiasm and energetic programming effort are
>>necessary, they are rarely sufficient to overcome a naive design of symbolic
>>>From: maxima-bounces at math.utexas.edu
>>>[mailto:maxima-bounces at math.utexas.edu] On Behalf Of Leo
>>>Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2006 7:04 AM
>>>To: maxima at math.utexas.edu
>>>Subject: Re: [Maxima] LAPACK with maxima
>>>* Robert Dodier (2006-12-22 23:21 -0700) said:
>>>>On 12/22/06, Raymond Toy <raymond.toy at ericsson.com> wrote:
>>>>>It's just very big, that's all. I haven't and don't plan on
>>>>>creating interfaces to all the functions. Eigenvalue/eigenvector
>>>>>and SVD seem useful, so I've done those.
>>>>>Perhaps it can be a share or contrib package, but I'm not even sure
>>>>>it should be checked into maxima at all.
>>>>If you mean some or all of LAPACK -- yes, I believe it should be
>>>>committed to cvs.
>>>Is this similar to what http://matlisp.sourceforge.net/ does?
>>>>I believe it is important and widely used, so it should in a
>>>>subdirectory of src (not share). We can work on creating interfaces
>>>>apart from just getting the f2cl output loaded into Maxima
>>>>Thanks for working on this problem,
>>>Leo <sdl.web AT gmail.com> (GPG Key: 9283AA3F)
>>>Maxima mailing list
>>>Maxima at math.utexas.edu
>>Maxima mailing list
>>Maxima at math.utexas.edu
More information about the Maxima