Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!randvax!Jeffrey P. Golden From: Jeffrey P. Golden Newsgroups: net.math.symbolic Subject: Speeding up Macsyma Message-ID: <2666@randvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 26-Aug-85 13:13:58 EDT Article-I.D.: randvax.2666 Posted: Mon Aug 26 13:13:58 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 1-Sep-85 12:53:30 EDT Sender: lseward@randvax.UUCP Distribution: net Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica Lines: 42 JPG@MIT-MC.ARPA 08/21/85 16:34:25 Re: symalg: speeding up MACSYMA From: bcsaic!toms (tom skillman) Newsgroups: net.math.symbolic Subject: Re: Speeding up macsyma Message-Id: <210@bcsaic.UUCP> Date: 13 Aug 85 16:07:32 GMT References: <365@brl-sem.ARPA> Reply-To: toms@bcsaic.UUCP (tom skillman) Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle Keywords: macsyma SMP REDUCE Apparently-To: symalg I don't know how to speed up macsyma but SMP from Inference Corp. in LA (213-417-7997) is supposed to be faster than macsyma. It is written in C and includes a FORTRAN code generator. MACSYMA also includes a FORTRAN code generator. What does "SMP ... is supposed to be faster than macsyma" mean? Who supposes this? Faster at what? How comprehensive are their tests? This issue has been discussed on the 'symalg' list in the past. The only source for this statement that I am aware of is a sheet put out by Inference Corp. I expect MACSYMA may be faster at some things, SMP at others. This is, in fact, confirmed in a paper by Wester and Steinberg in the Proceedings of the 1984 MACSYMA Users' Conference entitled "A Survey of Symbolic Differentiation Implementations". They conclude: "For some problems, MACSYMA was the fastest code (when used optimally), while for others, MAPLE or SMP was faster." I'm not surprised that the sheet put out by Inference contains mostly examples where SMP came out faster. I didn't expect them to publish examples where MACSYMA was faster. If you have independent benchmarks to support your claim, please let us know. I think this sort of "speed" contest is somewhat overblown anyway. What is more important is a comparison of capabilities and features. Norm Levin's concern for speed within MACSYMA (or SMP, or ...), however, is of importance. MACSYMA has good optimization and translation capabilities. There are articles on these in the aforementioned 1984 Proceedings. If you have a MACSYMA which lacks some capability here, I suggest you contact the distributors of MACSYMA to see what is now available.