You know in the light of ignorance of a matter there   
   are always two options. Jumping to conclusions, that   
   have later to be retracted.   
      
   Or being more sceptical, clearly naming speculations   
   as such. Concerning my choice of a focus on GB instead   
   of GCD, has already to do with the insight,   
      
   that for GB that does a criss-cross reduction, we   
   have the classical Euclidean GCD algorithm for   
   univariate polynomials,   
      
   how far we can go for multivariate polynomials is   
   part of my investigation, and any third party premature   
   opinions I will only consider   
      
   if they come with a lot of theoretical and practical   
   background. At the moment I cannot run Derive 6.0, but   
   I did some maxima GCD measurement yesterday,   
      
   these GCD are fast compared to the GB approach, but   
   maybe the maxima GB is slow. Who knows? Still   
   investigating very very very carefully.   
      
   Am Donnerstag, 6. Juli 2017 19:05:49 UTC+2 schrieb burs...@gmail.com:   
   > You were not only writing to me in private, you also   
   > went into lengths circumventing my blacklist I had   
   > already put you on. I blacklisted fateman@berkley.edu   
   > in my gmail account.   
   >   
   > You were using your other email adr fateman@gmail.com and   
   > did invest in figuring out an other email adr of mine.   
   > Thats pathological stalking, since I wrote you that you   
   > are blacklisted. Anyway now you are blacklisted even more.   
   >   
   > In the below paragraph there is possibly a negation   
   > of yours somewhere missing:   
   >   
   > Am Donnerstag, 6. Juli 2017 18:45:31 UTC+2 schrieb Richard Fateman:   
   > > Nevertheless, there are good reasons to believe that,   
   > > in any reasonably implemented CAS which   
   > > has  polynomial GCD and GB procedures,   that using GB to   
   > > implement a GCD  would be faster than the GCD.   
   >   
   > But there are a lot of results that relate GCD and GB.   
   > The easiest is for univariate polynomials, its found in   
   > the first few pages of David Cox; Little, John; O'Shea,   
   > Donald: Ideals, varieties, and algorithms. New York:   
   > Springer-Verlag, 1997   
   >   
   > All this has nothing to do with "somebody could write XY".   
   > These are mathematical and computational results. I am   
   > not prepared to give a full explanation here, since I am   
   > still chewing on the "bug", and I also want to make   
   >   
   > LispWork Prolog benchmark. So my hands are full at the   
   > moment. But you know, there are libraries.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)