That is my intention yes.  To have the field animate around the circle as it moves.  I just don't know if we can get Maple to do that?  I would like to see it if we could, just for fun.

Trying in the new version above.  10^6 does still comes up with error.

Trying to set animatefield=true produces the error

Warning, cannot evaluate the solution further right of .50568832, maxfun limit exceeded (see ?dsolve,maxfun for details)

Anyone know how to get animatefield=true to work?

@Kitonum I tried to animate the field around the moving circle but I get maxfun exceeded.  I wonder if we could also get a animatefield=true to work here somehow as well.

@tomferraren out of curiosity do you prefer working in Matlab?  Any reason why you couldn't continue to work with it in Maple?

You could copy the output Maple gives into Matlab and execute it to see if any errors are produced .. I don't even know if I'm thinking in a Matlab way it's just a thought. 

@Kitonum I think op means a circle moving, as an example, from x=1..-1 and the field changing around it.

Yes you can create graphs like that in Maple.  Just for fun without the scale it appears a is just smoothed b, b is some squared or doubled of c.

... What happened to your question regarding most efficient way to parse?

@tomleslie I'm surprised that ImportMatrix is faster than readdata.  I suppose the ImportMatrix is optimized while readdata is an old an unoptimized.  I originally thought that readdata was a builtin lower level, hence faster, routine.  Using showstat I was again surprised that ImportMatrix was a larger code - it almost boggles the mind that a larger code could be faster - coming to a conclusion again that readdata is not optimized code.

@tomleslie The conversion doesn't add much time, I read a 20Mb file with two rows of data and it took Maple 57 seconds to read it in and about a half a second to convert that to a Matrix.

I thought I recall being such a book but after thinking I was confusing two books on my shelf Gravitation and Cosmology by Weinberg and Quantum physics by Gasiorowicz and the book  Introduction to relativistic astrophysics and cosmology through Maple .. whoa!  I didn't even realize this existed as an application  http://www.maplesoft.com/applications/view.aspx?SID=3554&view=html  however it's existence is before the time of the Physics package.  I was originally going to point here http://www.rrp.infim.ro/2016_68_1/A3.pdf again however nothing to do with the Physics package.

I believe he was my first year University Calculus Professor way back in '91 (edit add or at least someone that was very closely a resemblance) in any case ...  Congratulations on your retirement and may your knowledge and contributions to maple continue with us here on mapleprimes.

Maple 12 is my all time favorite version of Maple, and I still use it today.  Maple 12 was probably the most popular version.  For interest purposes Maple 12 contains the most applications submitted to the application center, it may not be a true measure of popularity but does give some quantifiable measure outside of sales per version which only maplesoft knows.  Regarding age, M12 is still very capable software, in one case M2016 had a bug that didn't affect M12, .. I'm babbling but I believe an article was pointed out by Markiyan Hirnyk that discussed relying on software for research and taking the results at face value might not be such a wise idea .. but I digress.

Since elementwise operators was introduced in M13 my go to command in M12 is map and zip.

@Carl love  which is more efficient map or zip

@tsunamiBTP try searching Element-wise operators instead

It seems most always, new Maple users have trouble realizing e^x is not what is normal.  It is probably a confusion of see math the way it is - ironically I thought Maple was exactly that?  So based on that, one would think e^x would be exactly what you would expect. It's one of the caveats of the Maple language.  One could produce a small proc for that where e is actually exp() so if one did e^ some value.

Just have to define e:=exp(1):

or the proc but have to use brackets

e:=proc(x::numeric)
  evalf(exp(x)):
end proc:

Actually defining e:=exp(1) you'll have to use evalf so instead define it as e:=exp(1.)

@brian bovril I do recall vaguely seeing a shoelace formula but I do not remember when.  Are you still looking for the original post/question of the shoelace formula?  The most unfotunate part is that if shoelace wasn't used in the Title of the post/ Question it will not be found.  Most times I see Titles as quite vague about it's content such as "solution", "Another way" or "possible way" it doesn't help if search algorithms only search titles and not content. 

Regardless I found the content for " ThU. You are right. Shoelace's formula is a wonderful formula! It ... ThU. You
are right. Shoelace's formula is a wonderful formula! It"  Located here in this post http://www.mapleprimes.com/questions/151379-Geometry-area-Bounded-By-Lines#comment151394

But not the original shoelace formula

Is that what you were trying to locate?