From: noaddress@nowhere.net   
      
   On Thu, 13 Apr 2017 02:18:37 +0000, antispam wrote:   
      
   > Clark Smith  wrote:   
   >> On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 16:43:24 -0700, Richard Fateman wrote:   
   >>   
   >> > On 4/12/2017 12:19 PM, Clark Smith wrote:   
   >> >>      Are there any symbolic systems these days that ship with a full   
   >> >> implementation of the Risch algorithm?   
   >> >>   
   >> > 1. Probably not.   
   >> > 2. It is not an algorithm.   
   >> >   
   >> > Why do you ask?   
   >>   
   >>         Out of curiosity - I seem to recall that Axiom, when it was   
   >> called Scratchpad, claimed to have a near complete implementation.   
   >   
   > "near complete" is very imprecise statement.  In particular how you   
   > measure "nearness".  Even quite incomplete system may show good results   
   > on simple minded test, so looking at performance may give too rosy   
   > picture.  Another point of view is to look how much code in missing   
   > compared to complete implementation. Currently there is no complete   
   > implementation of full algorthm, so such criteria is hard to apply.  For   
   > transcendental part FriCAS has complete implementation (based on Axiom).   
   >  Axiom used about 8000 lines of code for integration of which probably   
   > about 4000 lines were specific to algebraic part.  So we can estimate   
   > transcendental part at less than 4000 lines.   
   > To get complete implementation in transcendental case FriCAS added about   
   > 2500 lines of code.  In the process Axiom implementation was simplified   
   > and about 1000 lines of code were removed.  Some of removed parts were   
   > replaced by new code, but some simplifications would be possible even   
   > without adding new code.  So we get somewhat fuzzy estimante that Axiom   
   > had 60-70% of needed code -- I my book missing 30% is fairly incomplete.   
   >   
   > Compared to Axiom FriCAS can handle more algebraic cases,   
   > but still there are quite large gaps.   
      
   	That's very useful information, thank you. I am a bit confused   
   though for, in your previous response, you claim that it is not an   
   algorithm, whereas in this one you seem to imply that it is. I would be   
   interested to learn what you mean precisely when you claim it is not an   
   algorithm.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)