integration and a graph

[SteenGroðe]

I know there has been a lot of integration issues so this one has probably already been reported, but I can't remember to have seen this graphing issue before.

Steen Gro�e

[ValeryOchkov]

Old good Mathcad 11 & Maple:

Val
http://twt.mpei.ac.ru/ochkov/v_ochkov.htm

[alnstevens]

Definitely an integration bug. Yet strangely, ln(x^x) integrates correctly (though the result isn't expressed as simply as it could be), as does xln(x)+1.

The graph plots if you specify values of x in advance (shouldn't need to do this, of course - it plots just fine in M11), or if you chose a log scale for y.

stv

[AlvaroDíaz]

On 3/6/2009 5:07:54 AM, stv wrote:
>The graph plots if you specify
>values of x in advance
>(shouldn't need to do this, of
>course - it plots just fine in
>M11), or if you chose a log
>scale for y.
>
>stv

Also if you change manually the Oy axis limits.

Alvaro

[mzeftel]

I logged this issue.

Mona

[ptc-1368288]

On 3/16/2009 11:03:10 AM, MonaZ wrote:
>I logged this issue.
>
>Mona
____________________

I'm not replying to the 14 bug, just to read more.

Jean

[GuyB]

On 3/18/2009 3:42:20 PM, sgrode wrote:
>On 3/5/2009 12:56:48 PM, sgrode wrote:
> [...]
>
>I do not garantee anything on this
>workaround maybe a lot of new issues
>will occur.... But
>it may be worse a try.

That bad, huh? 🙂

- Guy

[mzeftel]

Steen,

I just deleted your post about substituting the version of Mupad. I forwarded your post to the developer who works with Mupad and symbolics to see what he thought about it.

He replied that a number of other things will break, some of which may be subtle or not be apparent.

We're concerned about users having problems if they do this kind of substitution.

Mona

[ValeryOchkov]

On 3/19/2009 12:56:04 PM, MonaZ wrote:
>Steen,

I just deleted your
>post about substituting the
>version of Mupad. I forwarded
>your post to the developer who
>works with Mupad and symbolics
>to see what he thought about
>it.

He replied that a number
>of other things will break,
>some of which may be subtle or
>not be apparent.

Also
>changing something at that
>level in Mathcad is reverse
>engineering, which is a
>violation of your license
>agreement. I know that's not
>what you were trying to do,
>but it will cause problems,
>which we won't be able to
>support.


Mona Zeftel
Senior
>Mathcad Technical Consultant

PTC must have in Mathcad own little symbolic engine (as it was in StutyWorks) and have in Mathcad obgects: Maple, MuPad, Matematica etc.
And no future violation of license!
I think so!

Val
http://twt.mpei.ac.ru/ochkov/v_ochkov.htm

[ptc-1368288]

>PTC must have in Mathcad own little symbolic engine (as it was in StutyWorks) and have in Mathcad objects: Maple, MuPad, Matematica etc.
And no future violation of license!
I think so! [Val]
______________________

That means two more licenses for PTC. Maple might refuse as well as Mathematica and lot of development + $$$. The reason Mathcad is not Maple anymore is unknown to users (?). Is it reversible to Maple ? Don't know either.

jmG

[ValeryOchkov]

One idea!
PTC has in 20?? a new Mathcad with a new symbolic engine (one little part of someone else's math program). PTC announces a competition who quickly open the closed part of this sybbolic kernel!
See the competition with IE 8!
Val
http://twt.mpei.ac.ru/ochkov/v_ochkov.htm