Okay, you wouldn't want to touch your system maple.mla library. The administrative burden, and updates issue, are important.

I was wondering how exactly you have been using your new library. You mentioned that you could access it fine in Maple proper (not TA). Do you do this by reassigning libname in the Maple session? I mean, does the library reside in some folder which is not normally found under the default libname? Maybe it would work, if TA did not have to do that and could rely on the default libname.

If that is the case then maybe a solution could involve ensuring that the library archive is found by the default libname. You do not want any solution that involves adding libraries to anywhere under your Maple installation folder (which may even reside on a networked drive). But Maple should automatically add to libname any folder that looks like a "personal" installation of a Maple toolbox. For example, suppose that in Maple the command kernelopts(homedir) reported "C:\Documents and Settings\pagan". If I were to add a new chain of folders "C:\Documents and Settings\pagan\maple\toolbox\12\foo\lib" then that would also appear in libname in subsequent fresh Maple 12 sessions. I would not have to reassign libname with a command.

If you are using older .lib Maple library archives then make sure that both the .ind and .lib files get put in place together. For the newer .mla format, there is just the one file to place.

Okay, you wouldn't want to touch your system maple.mla library. The administrative burden, and updates issue, are important.

I was wondering how exactly you have been using your new library. You mentioned that you could access it fine in Maple proper (not TA). Do you do this by reassigning libname in the Maple session? I mean, does the library reside in some folder which is not normally found under the default libname? Maybe it would work, if TA did not have to do that and could rely on the default libname.

If that is the case then maybe a solution could involve ensuring that the library archive is found by the default libname. You do not want any solution that involves adding libraries to anywhere under your Maple installation folder (which may even reside on a networked drive). But Maple should automatically add to libname any folder that looks like a "personal" installation of a Maple toolbox. For example, suppose that in Maple the command kernelopts(homedir) reported "C:\Documents and Settings\pagan". If I were to add a new chain of folders "C:\Documents and Settings\pagan\maple\toolbox\12\foo\lib" then that would also appear in libname in subsequent fresh Maple 12 sessions. I would not have to reassign libname with a command.

If you are using older .lib Maple library archives then make sure that both the .ind and .lib files get put in place together. For the newer .mla format, there is just the one file to place.

The bit of the error message where it says ".lib file" makes me wonder. Maybe it used to work with .lib/.ind Maple library archive pairs, but no longer works with newer .mla libraries?

If you're really desperate, could you consider copying your Maple installation's original maple.mla library (as a backup), making it writable, and then adding your custom functionality to it?

The bit of the error message where it says ".lib file" makes me wonder. Maybe it used to work with .lib/.ind Maple library archive pairs, but no longer works with newer .mla libraries?

If you're really desperate, could you consider copying your Maple installation's original maple.mla library (as a backup), making it writable, and then adding your custom functionality to it?

My guess was that, somehow, the inner integrand might be the simplified result of adding two terms (perhaps each of which would then work in `int`, while the sum might not). I guessed this on the weak grounds that I thought that I saw hints in Edgar's posts in the other thread that you cited.

When seeing Edgar's challenge problem, my first thought was convert(W,Int) and to try working from there.

This used derivatives of exp. Maybe that's "legal" here, it might depend on one's view of what's allowed when introducing ln(a).

Instead of defining ln as inverse of exp, mabe use the integral defn for ln(a). See, eg. Spivak who brings in ln prior to introducing exp. What about re-expressing that integral as a Riemann sum (as h->0)? Does that limiting sum collapse down to the desired statement?

This used derivatives of exp. Maybe that's "legal" here, it might depend on one's view of what's allowed when introducing ln(a).

Instead of defining ln as inverse of exp, mabe use the integral defn for ln(a). See, eg. Spivak who brings in ln prior to introducing exp. What about re-expressing that integral as a Riemann sum (as h->0)? Does that limiting sum collapse down to the desired statement?

Why do you think that the result should be undefined, when computed under RealDomain?

Would it help, to be able to do all the substitutions in a single call to subs()? Note that, with the many-argument form of subs(), the substitutions are done succesively from left to right.

> F := t -> 1+x(t)^2+t^3 ;
                                             2    3
                           F := t -> 1 + x(t)  + t
 
> D[1](F)(1);
                              2 x(1) D(x)(1) + 3
 
> subs(D(x)(1)=F(1),x(1)=-4, %);
                                     -141

Would it help, to be able to do all the substitutions in a single call to subs()? Note that, with the many-argument form of subs(), the substitutions are done succesively from left to right.

> F := t -> 1+x(t)^2+t^3 ;
                                             2    3
                           F := t -> 1 + x(t)  + t
 
> D[1](F)(1);
                              2 x(1) D(x)(1) + 3
 
> subs(D(x)(1)=F(1),x(1)=-4, %);
                                     -141

The Wikipedia Conflict of Interest (COI) page shows that there are a number of different circumstances that might characterize COI. Spam removal and vandalism clean-up is covered under non-controversial edits and are allowed. So your statetent that editing by employees "clearly" conflicts with those COI guidelines is not necessarily true. On the other hand, whitewashing (for product promotion or to cover up well-documented criticism, say) by employees paid to do that specifically would fall under COI.

On account of the absence of a response, I suppose that nobody received it.

Who received the award for the quarter of April-June, 2008?

Now, how does this match up with the result from Alec's suggestion?

int(2/(1-k^2*sin(2*t*phi/Pi)^2)^(1/2)/Pi*phi,
t=0..1/2*Pi,AllSolutions) assuming k>0, k<1, phi>0;
simplify(%,symbolic);