Talk:Mathematical software

Computer Algebra Systems

Please update the CAS section, MATLAB also has the Symbolic Math Toolbox which is a general purpose Computer Algebra System. Note, I am a MathWorker (Spalfrey (talk) 19:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC))

Mozart and Lingo

Why are Mozart and Lingo listed under Computer Algebra Systems? Their description reads they are just programming languages. Gesslein 22:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Good point, I looked up Mozart's features [1] and the two interesing ones from our position are

Constraint Programming

Oz is a powerful constraint language with logic variables, finite domains, finite sets, rational trees and record constraints. The system is competitive in performance with state-of-the-art commercial solutions, but is much more expressive and flexible, providing first-class computation spaces, programmable search strategies, a GUI for the interactive exploration of search trees, parallel search engines exploiting computer networks, and a programming interface to implement new and efficient constraint systems.

Logic Programming

Oz goes beyond Horn-clauses to provide a unique and flexible approach to logic programming. Oz distinguishes between directed and undirected styles of declarative logic programming. For both, Oz lets you specify a program's logical semantics separately from its resolution strategy. Powerful tools and libraries are provided built on the concepts of first-class computation spaces and determinacy-driven disjunctions. Together with distribution, this makes Mozart an ideal platform for both intelligent multi-agent systems and parallel search.

So its a languge which allow some form of logic programming. Not a Computer Algebra System, but might be of interest somewhere here. --Salix alba (talk) 23:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Why not just link to "List of computer algebra systems" under Computer Algebra Systems? Gesslein 16:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Other sections

Other sections might be: optimization software, CFD, FEA, theorem provers, morphological image processing, number theory software. I am sure there are others.Greenmatter (talk) 10:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mathematical software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150312002846/http://toms.acm.org/Charter.html to http://toms.acm.org/Charter.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Some recent changes to the lead section

Recently, this article's lead section was re-written, but it still seems confusing in some places.

For example:

Specially, It may be sure common sense that to the attention that there is a such as next case in mathematical software using:

1. That is no security to solving neccesaly. [sic]

Does this lead section need to be re-written again? Jarble (talk) 22:35, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Eric Rowland (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

@Eric Rowland: Since the lead section was incomprehensible, I restored the previous version of this section (from three years ago). Jarble (talk) 15:38, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

@Eric Rowland: ...but this section is still mostly unintelligible, so it needs to be rewritten. Jarble (talk) 15:57, 27 May 2021 (UTC)