Re: Some other symbolic math programs...

[George <jirka@5z.com>]

On Tue, Feb 29, 2000 at 10:38:19AM +0100, Richard B. Kreckel wrote:
> I don't know where DrGenius is heading to but let me comment on the use of
> such packages.  I have been considering this issue for incorporating one
> of them into the GiNaC framework and came to the conclusion that it would
> be better not to do so.  The problem is: All those packages are designed

My idea was to actually use GiNaC here?  Though I don't know much about it so
I dunno how appropriate it would be.  If I understand GiNaC and am not
mistaking it with something else, we should be able to build an equation tree
from our parsed expression, then pass it to ginac to play with, then get it
back and convert to our type of tree.  So here I assume ginac is a library
for symbolic math and just happens to use cln as the package for storing
numbers.  Am I correct?

We're not interested in speed really.  It's mostly for education and testing
things.  If someone wants to do a lot of heavyweight calculations he'll be
better off choosing a specific package for the specific problem.  So I mostly
want it to do lots of stuff, rather then do limitted things fast.

George