CASs vs. octave numerics (was: Re: Symbolic expand function doesn't always do anything)

[Jonathan Stickel]

edA-qa mort-ora-y wrote:
> Jonathan Stickel wrote:
>
> > Have you considered using a true CAS, e.g. Maxima?  Or do you interface
> > your symbolic results with octave numerics?
>
>
> My main use of such a system has always been numerics, but now I seem to 
> be going into the realm of symbolics a lot more (always needing numeric 
> solutions at the end though).
>
> I must admit though, I truly don't understand why there is a separation 
> between tools such as Octave and Maxima.  Why would I choose to use one 
> over the other?

I've been troubled by this as well.  For the most part, though, I use a 
CAS to arrive at formulas which I then use for numerical calculations. 
I'd love to see an example where one interfaces symbolic manipulation 
with numerical methods, but from my experience they are often completely 
separate.

CASs can do numerics, but their available routines are often slow, 
cumbersome, and incomplete compared to Matlab/Octave.  To be honest, 
Mathematica seems to do both symbolics and numerics very well, but it 
certainly is not free.  Since my symbolic needs are small, I've found 
Maxima to be adequate, but I do my numerical work in Octave.

Jonathan



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------