Hello, voicing yet another opinion: Sheplyakov Alexei schrieb:
I think GiNaC is special-purpose library. One of the goals of GiNaC is efficient handling of quite a large expressions (an sum of ~10^6 terms
Yes. Exactly.
is not really a big expression). Thus, GiNaC provides only basic functionality, since one can't probably do any funky things with such expressions anyway. I don't know if GiNaC's approach is useful for
I'd like to see more higher-level functionality in GiNaC :-) (but without sacrificing its initial design principles). High-level functionality is useful sometimes even with huge expressions (such a functionality might be applied not on the whole expression but on its simple building blocks...).
something except calculations in perturbative quantum field theory (and frankly, I don't care much).
The main "feature" of GiNaC is that it is a C++ library! You never guessed that, didn't you ;-) *All* restrictions of its usefulness stem from this fact (and also the lack of manpower available). Suppose we had unlimited manpower for expanding GiNaC. Would its initial design allow for raising its algebra capabilities to levels on par with Mathematica, Maple, etc. Yes! Would people use it then? No! I guess 99% of all people that need to use computer algebra want to find the answers to their mathematical problems by trying/learning/manipulating things *interactively*. GiNaC is not just made for perturbative quantum field theory. But the combination of GiNaC's features and its mode of use are hardly sought after outside this community. Regards, Jens