acer

26362 Reputation

29 Badges

16 years, 319 days

Social Networks and Content at Maplesoft.com

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by acer

@Carl Love I was only looking withing a specific range on purpose. I had hoped that the student would at least investigate a little.

The question only asks for a (one) maximum and a (one) saddle-point, as I understand it.

 

@Scot Gould StringTools:-StringBuffer constructs a module, and is implemented in an OO manner. But it is not an Object (in the sense that its return value is not of type object, or in the technical Object sense which I believe was part of the OP's original queries.) It has no static exports and each instance carries its own copy of its exports.

That is in contrast to the Today constructor of the Calendar package.

[edit] Just to make this more confusing, there is also an example StringBuffer on the objects,methods Help page, and that is implemented with an Object constructor.

@Joe Riel Thanks, Joe. I wasn't paying attention and completely misunderstood the purpose of the example. My Answer clearly doesn't satisfy the quoted request.

Perhaps I should simply delete the answer.

[edit] I will let it stand, and instead quote from the object,methods Help page:

    Object Must Be Passed into Methods
    If you declare a method that needs to access the contents of
    an object, that object must be passed into the method as an
    argument.  This is in contrast to some object oriented languages
    which allow access to the contents of an object associated with
    the current invocation, either through direct access to the
    object's members or through a self variable.  The method will
    have access to the local variables of any object of the same
    class that the method was declared in.

@janhardo The idea of an interval of convergence was mentioned before. And this allows your last example to succeed.

value(Sum(x^(n - 1), n = 1 .. infinity)) assuming x>-1, x<1;

                                1
                            - -----
                              x - 1

You could also use active sum(...) instead of value(Sum(...)). And you could use abs(x)<1 instead of the pair x>-1, x<1.

What have you managed to do so far, with this?

@janhardo 

restart;
R := convert(ln(1+x),FPS):
value(R) assuming x>-1, x<1;
                             ln(1 + x)

sum(op(R), formal);
                             ln(1 + x)

[edit] The series does not converge for all x. The `sum` command is being careful about what it returns here. (It doesn't even converge for all real x. And judging by the context of this and earlier textbook questions this is not about complex numbers.)

You should show us what you've done so far, or describe with which details you got stuck, etc.

@mmcdara Actually, the name `` gets used reasonably often as an easy wrapping mechanism to avoid automatic simplification, especially for pretty-printing effects.

It was more common before InertForm was introduced, but it is still not very rare.

There are lots of Answers on this very forum, where it has been so used.

It is also what the ifactor command uses.

lprint( ifactor(114) );

``(2)*``(3)*``(19)

The output of ifactor includes unevaluated calls to it, but a subsequent evaluation would reveal whatever it have been clobbered with.

Another choice of dummy name would be better, IMO.

@Liiiiz Your uploaded attachment shows combined display of whatever was assigned to p61w and p62w. But the worksheet does not assign to p61w, so as uploaded it does not produce the same results as the saved sheet.

Could you adjust that?

You should show us what lambda61 is.

You can upload and attach a worksheet using the green up-arrow in the Mapleprimes editor.

 

@macubear I don't know what you mean by the acronym MWE, sorry.

A bit more on terminology. You originally described something like common memory access, so I answered with something that involves combining python/C with the Maple kernel process in order to get a direct access to memory.

But you also used the terms "output" and "pipe", which seems more like a description of i/o between processes (...and in which context sockets seem to make more sense).

So I'm not really sure which you prefer (i/o or direct memory access) and what are the precise motivations.

In Maple a datatype=float[8] rtable (Array, Vector, Matrix) stores its data as double precision floats in a contiguous block of memory, so access can be direct and efficient. But OpenMaple also has facilities for conversion of other scalar numeric types (ie. back and forth between Maple and C, say).

But I know little about "direct" python<->C interaction, or C "extension" to python.

There is no unknown deltao in f, so how can you use f to make a plot of anything versus deltao?

What is delta0, which you are using as the second plotting parameter name in the implicitplot call? If it's suposed to be deltao (because, say, you didn't actually intend a "loop") then why does deltao range from 0 to 4 and delta0 from 0 to 1?

Your f has only one unknown, Y.

Your code and explanation are muddled. You should correct and explain it.

@Carl Love I'll point out that his original code did not have any local type declarations in the procedure Basenweschel, and the semicolon you've mentioned was not incorrect. It merely happened to have not accomplished anything or been necessary, originally. In his original code, it acted like a null statement.

Also, the issues you've mentioned are not the cause original problem with the code returning the same result for different calls. They are merely incidental syntax issues related to inserting explicit local declarations in one of the procedures. I realize that you, Carl, know all this, but others might not.

@Spirithaunter The command,

   kernelopts(version);

will print out the name of the version. You can also see it using the main menubar's Help->About Maple item. I can also now tell from your attachment that it is Maple 2016. I will adjust the header in this Question accordingly. Thank you.

It seems that the semicolon terminator in   proc(....);  before the explicit local declaration was an issue in that version. It's great if it's working better for you now. You may still need to make sure that it's computing as you expect, as I didn't look at what the full code was trying to compute.

[edit] I will add that the procedure Basenwechsel does not need to be defined as part of the body of procedure NEUZMinus. As you coded it each call to NEUZMinus will recreate procedure Basenwechsel, which is unnecessary and not most efficient. I did not bother to adjust this because I have an idea that the code could be generally improved and it does not target the original issue.

Is there some problem with uploading an attaching a worksheet that can be used to reproduce the problem? (The green up-arrow in the Mapleprimes editor can be used for that.)

Providing code-to-reproduce is much more useful than entering into a guessing game.

First 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Last Page 71 of 489