@nMaple Yes, you could use N individual procedures P[i], as there are lots of ways to accomplish your task. I don't understand why you really want that, though.

But somehow you'll get to the value of i into the procedure(s).

You could burn the values of R1, R2, Z2, and Z2 into N different procedures. objvar1.mw

Or you could keep their references unresolved until the procedures are called. objvar2.mw

I can think of several other ways, as well. For example you could have a single procedure P that examing its own procname and pulled on whatever index value (for you, i) had been passed. I won't bother to code that up.

All of these seem more awkward to program, to me, or harder to explain to you, or wasteful of resources.

This isn't all about programming graphics in Maple. It's about programming in general. So you could try learning from the Programming Manual.

That reply I just made above, objnew.mw, will work. But it could be more efficient since the definition of procedure P can be outside the loop. And it needs to be, if the earlier remember table assignments are not to be clobbered.

This should be faster,

objnewer.mw

Notice also the I used the smaller `grid` values, as in my original Answer.

@nMaple 

objnew.mw

@bacalfa You have specified that Maple use those versions of `+`, etc, by loading that package.

And it does make a difference. With it loaded then expressions with mixed units will have them combined automatically when they are added together, etc.

If you did not discover this aspect of the behaviour then why do you insist on loading that package?

@nMaple I forgot that you were running Maple 17, sorry.

Change the appropriate line to,

h := Z->plots:-display(`if`(Z>10,fB(min(Z,20)),NULL),
                       `if`(Z>5,fC(min(Z,10)),NULL),
                       `if`(Z>0,fA(min(Z,5)),plot3d([[0,0,0]],h=0..1,phi=0..Pi)),
                       axes = normal, scaling = constrained):

@want to be a permanent vegan Use Comments on the original Question to add additional information, or else if the question point has not significantly changed then a new, duplicate Question may get flagged for removal (as a Duplicate).

Reposting because nobody's answered the original is just spamming.

@want to be a permanent vegan Why are you spamming this site with multiple posts on the same question?

@nMaple Maple will export such animations as animated .gif files. You can do that by right-clicking on the plot, or with some programmatic commands.

Here is leaner code. It executes faster, saves to a much smaller file, and is a bit less hard on the poor Java GUI. The idea is that each of the three pieces is a surface which is linear in z. So the plot3d calls only need to use a value of 3 for the grid, in that dimension.

Download athing2.mw

@nMaple Please let me know or not, whether this is the kind of thing you want to do.

(This file is 25MB, since it has the 40 frame animation saved from two methods.)

Download athing1.mw

@nMaple I'm pretty sure that you misunderstood my meaning, or at best misapplied the idea I was trying to convey.

That name is a bit unusual. It seems to be `Νu` rather than just Nu, so I assigned it to `var` to avoid cut&paste issues, etc.

@nMaple In Maple 17 you could try it as, say,

A := plot3d([2*cos(phi), 2*sin(phi), z], z = 0 .. 5, phi = 0 .. 2*Pi):

B := plot3d([8*cos(phi), 8*sin(phi), z], z = 10 .. 20, phi = 0 .. 2*Pi):

C := plot3d([(2+6*((z-5)*(1/5)))*cos(phi), (2+6*((z-5)*(1/5)))*sin(phi), z],
             z = 5 .. 10, phi = 0 .. 2*Pi):

plots[display](A, B, C, axes = normal, scaling = constrained,
               style=surface, glossiness=1.0, lightmodel=Light4);

@tomleslie It is not true what you wrote in the other thread, that the way with uses LA=LinearAlgebra; is incorrect. There are several valid ways of utilizing uses. The problem in the earlier thread was that neither valid way was being used for one call (to Transpose).

The problem(s) here are different. The while i<>j look like a problem(in at least understanding). Also the abs(x-p) should probably be LinearAlgebra:-Norm(x-p) or similar. I haven't considered further.

@sunflower You need that to be LinearAlgebra:-Transpose or LA:-Transpose (since for the latter you are already doing uses LA=LinearAlgebra.

I don't really understand why you are doing those LinearSolve calls on hard-coded b, but perhaps you intend to do something more general with it later on. You certainly don't need to print(x) if you are just going to return x.

What do you expect to happen if any of the L[i,i] are zero?

acer