Mac Dude

1541 Reputation

17 Badges

11 years, 226 days

MaplePrimes Activity

These are answers submitted by Mac Dude

You really don't give enough details, but what about the following:

You can get the set of parameters using indets(array,'name'). If you have other indeterminates besides your parameters then they will show up, too, so you may have to filter the list. You get the number of parameters from numelems(indets(array,'name')) or using the filtered list.

Presumably you have a list of values you want to assign to the parameters. You can do this using eval(array,[seq(indets(array)[ii]=values[ii],ii=1..numelems(indets(array,'name')))]). Somehow you have to know the list of your values, obviously, and it is not clear to me how you do that when you do not know the number of parameters, but that seems to be a separate problem.

Here is a code snippet:

                       Array(1 .. 3, {1 = f(x1), 2 = f(x2), 3 = f(x3)})
X:=indets(A,'name'); # these are your parameters
                          {x1, x2, x3}
                           [1, 2, 3]
                         Array(1 .. 3, {1 = f(1), 2 = f(2), 3 = f(3)})

This will scale to any length of A and X.

Let us know if this addresses your problem or is off the mark.


If it is a specific Maple command that takes a longtime: not easily. You can observe the memory and time indicators in the bottom status line of the window: if memory usage goes up and up you likely have expression swell (or a memory leak) that causes things to slow to a crawl or hang; if the time stops updating, the kernel (or the interface process) may be hung.

If it is a loop, you can put a print statement to follow through the iterations. For a nicer way, put something like a gauge into your sheet & update it each iteration. I do this for calculations I know take a long time.

If you can, start with a simpler case that works (e.g. smaller matrices) & add complexity or whatever slows things down (e.g. size of Matrices). As a general rule, if you observe growth in calculation time with the size of your problem much faster than linear or quadratic you are in trouble with larger problem size.

Beyond these generalities you need to shows us a worksheet that exhibits the prroblem you are trying to address.


Attached is an example of mine called Filters. The library is a module that contains all the functions you want in there.

You then need to save it where Maple can find it. As you can see, I pre-pended (in my maple.init file) my library directory to the others in libname; Maple will look in my own directory first before looking in its general directory (thus I can overlay my own definitions if I so chose). then you use LibraryTools:-Save to put the .mla file in there.

After that, with(Filters) (in my case) will find it.

I do agree with SGJanssens suggestion, but this example may get you going faster.


I think the closest to structs are records. They are related to modules but are more geared towards data structures, although you can store procedures as well. You can access members of a record using :- notation.


Struct := Record(c=2*Pi*rho,a=Pi*rho^2);

     2 π rho
    π rho^2

Members can be Vectors, Arrays, you name it.

As for speed, Maple can be ok if you spend time programming it right. Naive implementation can lead to constant reallocation of memory, which gets costly. I am no expert on this although I have certainly run into unexpected super-linear growth of execution time with the number of cases. Declaring datatype=float (as opposed to "anything") in Vectors can help.

Look up the Maple Programming guide; a treasure trove of good practices.

I hope this helps,

Mac Dude

You can use LinearAlgebra:-MatrixExponential(A) to evaluate exp(A).

You can also first Taylor-expand A and then substitute A:



convert((5),polynom); # (5) is the above expression

The output of exp(A) is in the attached sheet, too big to print here

You'll have to decide whether the above does what you intend.

Mac Dude


I corrected your expression by replacing the square brackets [] with parentheses () and the &ndash; with - (minus sign). Your formula then reads like this:

f := x -> exp((-1)*0.13/x)(0.4700036292*`-`(0.3364722366, 1.2)) + exp(-1/x)(0.2135277634 + 0.528*x) + (-1)*0.528*x + 0.5420043550;

Now you can try solve:

and Maple replies


You can now check the result



I hope this helps,


While not particularly elegant, I use cut & paste for such tasks. In fact, being a bit paranoid, I copy-paste the code out of the section first and then delete the original and the section.

After that, double-check your references if you referenced to any formulae in the moved sections of code. Usually Maple is good at keeping track of things, but in this case I think you have to update your references.

Mac Dude.

Use frontend to temporarily freeze the functions. The trick is that you need to specify the set of types to not freeze, the defaults (`+`,`*`) don't work as then the whole set is frozen. And -y(0) is of type `*` since it is -1*y(0), so you need to include that as well.



You need to decide whether this is simpler & fits your purpose.


Edit: typos & concluding remark

I don't know what "CO2" in this context means (CO2 in my book is a gas, not a mass unit), but I am probably missing something here.

Anyway, the Units package has the AddUnits function that seems to me may be what you want:

      5 Schritt
     4 m

So in the "conversion" option you put the relation of your new unit to existing units. "combine" converts the custom unit to the default unit. "UseUnit()" sets the default unit to what you want. Note that AddUnit() can override existing units.


Note that the Units package has several systems it can work in (SI, cgs, etc.). You probably need to select the system before AddUnit.

I hope this helps,


Here is one way to transfer info from Maple sheet A to Maple sheet B. The code snippets are from actual code I wrote and use.

In sheet A, you write out the items you need in sheet B. Note that these can be numbers or expressions. I put the left sides in quotes to avoid evaluation of the names.


Note that some of these are eval statements.

In sheet B, you read-in the file:


at which point you have all the variables assigned as they are given in the file. In the example many were expressions.

This works for small-ish data quantities. I remember I ran into issues when trying to use the same mechanism for large quantities (rtables, tables, modules and such) where the info just would not make it across. If you look up a previous question of mine here on MaplePrimes ("How can I save a Record...") then you can read through a whole thread where acer is explaining how to do that using .mla files. I did struggle with that (as is evident from the thread) but eventually I did get it to work.

I hope this helps,


Maple has a front-end (user interface, the program you interact with) and a kernel that executes the statements you enter. These are separate processes. Usually the connection-lost message indicates that the kernel crashed. The question then is "Why would it do that?"

The output you get indicates rather beefy RAM usage: 32 GB allocated and about a TB used??  That sounds like an endless loop to me that you let run for a long time. So you need to go back to your code & put in a few strategic print() statements to see if it works as expected. Note that you can limit the time it runs if you don't want to wait until it dies; alternately, since you use the command line, ^C is your friend (Don't run it with nohup and do not detach your terminal).

If it gets hung in the Groebner Basis calculation, then you need to check whether the input to that is as expected. Beyond that I cannot help, not being familiar with the Groebner package.


Loading a package using with() masks the global definition of any symbol you export in the package. I once wrote a package that redefined the same dot operator you use, `.`. As a result the global definition of `.` no longer was effective & I had to revert to a messy construction using overload() to apply my redefinition only to the types that needed it. So the behaviour you see seems to me as expected. Do note that VectorCalculus:-`.` could be written such that it preserves the functionality of :-`.` by clever way of using type definitions. In that sense, VectorCalculus:-`.` indeed can check its arguments & fall back on using the normal :-`.` where applicable. I hasten to add that I don't know what VectorCalculus:-`.` is actually doing in this regard.

I have been wondering about the effect of name clashes myself, when several packages redefine the same symbol. So just as you are, I am hesitant loading multiple packages using with(). It should not be difficult to test Maple's behaviour in such cases. I'd speculate that using several with() statements, each in its own execution group, the last one wins.


Yes, this does happen, and it can be mighty annoying as all variable values are gone & one cannot find out what went wrong. There is no good way around this I know; but a few hints:

(a): Save a sheet before you attempt to run it. In this way you preserve your starting point.

(b): If this happens in a loop, lower the end point so that it only does a very limited number of iterations. Print the index at each iteration so you know how far it gets.

(c): Check the memory value at the bottom of the sheet. If it goes up and up you are likely running into "expression swell", i.e. some intermediate expressions are growing, most likely exponentially. Terminate the process in the early stages so you can get an idea which ones are growing. Occasionally (but not very often) I have had luck with running simplify at each step. If you use modules and Records you may run into a memory leak, i.e. Maple keeps allocating space for new objects which will make it run out of memory while at the same time slow it to a crawl. This situation also reveals itself in an increase in time per iteration if a loop is involved (which is usually the case).

(d): Post an example here that shows this behaviour. Mention the Maple version you run.

There are ways to limit space and time but I don't know whether they preserve variables. Check help on kernelopts() for these.


plots:-setoptions(size=[1200,500]) in your .mapleinit file will make this the default for 2d plots.

I do note that I have had on occasion issues with setoptions, so it is conceivable that for thing like plots:-display() the option might be ignored.

Mac Dude

Edit: You can set most option with this command. See the Help on setoptions.

f is overwritten near the end of the loop; the new f with no more c[i] is then used in eq1 on the 2nd pass  through the loop. Then the fsolve returns NULL (no variables to solve for) and the eval fails. If this is intended then you have a problem. If f is always to have the form as in the assignment after eq1, then assign the eval to g near the bottom and plot g. That produces this plot:


Mac Dude


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Last Page 2 of 20