Thanks, Joe. As always, your code is sharper. I was just playing around. Under 10 lines of code and all the relevent builtins can be tested for zero (or other bad) arguments. Rinse and repeat, for each comprehensive test run of the product. acer

Maple 11.00, > `**`(); Execution stopped: Stack limit reached. I mention it, only because `**` has a different option builtin number than does `^`. Also, when I look at the help-page obtained with ?`**` I don't see `**` mentioned. Am I just not seeing it? It's pretty easy to test this sort of thing, too. A := [anames(builtin)]; A := remove( x->type(x,{ identical(`?[]`),identical(goto),identical(`assemble`), identical(`disassemble`),identical(`pointto`), identical(`DEBUG`),identical(`RETURN`),identical(`**`), identical(`^`) }), A ); for x in A do x; try x(); x(0); x(-1) catch: print(lastexception); end try; end do; acer

I wonder whether there was a "ban" on using array(), rather than the newer Array(). acer

I wonder whether there was a "ban" on using array(), rather than the newer Array(). acer

Please post a specific example, so that we can see to what you are referring. acer

I find this discussion fascinating. It reminded me of an idea that I've been playing with: whether abstract linear algebra (for use with LinearAlgebra, say) might be done reasonably well using attributes. Attributes on just what,.. that I don't know. acer

I tried this in both Maple 11.00 and 10.06, just for fun. In 10.06 it ran longer and seemed to use more memory. Interestingly, in 11.00 I saw no garbage collection messages while in 10.06 I did see gc update messages. I'm not sure how to reconcile that with more apparent memory consumption/use in 10.06. acer

I tried this in both Maple 11.00 and 10.06, just for fun. In 10.06 it ran longer and seemed to use more memory. Interestingly, in 11.00 I saw no garbage collection messages while in 10.06 I did see gc update messages. I'm not sure how to reconcile that with more apparent memory consumption/use in 10.06. acer

I'm not sure what it means, to be "first class objects" in Maple. Hardware scalar floats can exist stand-alone. But they'll only come into being (apart from when using their constructor explicitly) within a proc with option hfloat. > kernelopts(version); Maple 11.00, X86 64 LINUX, Feb 16 2007 Build ID 277223 > x:=HFloat(1.2); x := 1.19999999999999996 > dismantle(%); HFLOAT(2): 1.2 Also, see ?option_hfloat acer

I'm not sure what it means, to be "first class objects" in Maple. Hardware scalar floats can exist stand-alone. But they'll only come into being (apart from when using their constructor explicitly) within a proc with option hfloat. > kernelopts(version); Maple 11.00, X86 64 LINUX, Feb 16 2007 Build ID 277223 > x:=HFloat(1.2); x := 1.19999999999999996 > dismantle(%); HFLOAT(2): 1.2 Also, see ?option_hfloat acer

The mixture sin-Pi isn't very useful. Does one apply it, as an operator, or evaluate it at a point, or...? > k := sin-Pi; k := sin - Pi > k(1.1); 0.8912073601 - Pi(1.1) > eval(k(x),x=1.1); 0.8912073601 - Pi(1.1) How would you plot it? Distinguishing between sin-1/2 and sin-sqrt(2) seems inconsistent to me. acer

R[3] accesses the 3rd entry of Vector R. More abstractly, R[i] accesses the ith entry, given a positive integer i less than the upper index bound (here, 10^6). You can also extract sub-Vectors, eg. R[3..11] . If Vector R has a million entries, then how would you want to look at them? ArrayTools[AddAlongDimension](R) should sum all the entries in Vector R. acer

R[3] accesses the 3rd entry of Vector R. More abstractly, R[i] accesses the ith entry, given a positive integer i less than the upper index bound (here, 10^6). You can also extract sub-Vectors, eg. R[3..11] . If Vector R has a million entries, then how would you want to look at them? ArrayTools[AddAlongDimension](R) should sum all the entries in Vector R. acer

I used a Vector, rather than a list, to store the final result. And I gave it a hardware datatype, just to try to keep allocation down. I don't think that I used lists at all, trying instead to use add() to sum the 12 values (at each iteration) without forming the sequences explicitly. acer

I used a Vector, rather than a list, to store the final result. And I gave it a hardware datatype, just to try to keep allocation down. I don't think that I used lists at all, trying instead to use add() to sum the 12 values (at each iteration) without forming the sequences explicitly. acer