-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 654
Update to maxima 5.48 #40679
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Update to maxima 5.48 #40679
Conversation
@tobiasdiez looks like this is still not available in conda, any idea who to ping to make it happen? |
Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit a58c077; changes) is ready! 🎉 |
Only conda-forge/maxima-feedstock#40 needs to be merged by either @isuruf or @saraedum. |
@@ -1673,7 +1673,7 @@ class SphericalBesselJ(BuiltinFunction): | |||
sage: spherical_bessel_J(4, x).simplify() | |||
-((45/x^2 - 105/x^4 - 1)*sin(x) + 5*(21/x^2 - 2)*cos(x)/x)/x | |||
sage: integrate(spherical_bessel_J(1,x)^2,(x,0,oo)) | |||
1/6*pi | |||
0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reported this regression upstream at https://sourceforge.net/p/maxima/bugs/4601/
You may want to base this on #40574 in case some of the new output changes. I got started with the 5.48.x upgrade but gave up when I realized that not all of the output changes are improvements. (Thinking: we may want to support 5.47.x simultaneously rather than force people to upgrade to a version with regressions, but this is a lot of work). |
IMO anything in a |
Since that is already positively reviewed and this will take some time, I will rebase it after the next beta. Besides the non-trivial work of rewriting the doctests, supporting both versions also requires dealing with the |
A bit of dreaming: After #39030, we could have meson write the version of maxima (or actually all dependencies) into |
Actually, it looks like we may just drop that CORRECTION: That redefinition is there since the introduction of the maxima lib interface in 970a833, not clear why. Running CI now without it to see if anything breaks. |
Seems to be needed:
|
It seems to be no longer needed, and requires divergent code for different maxima versions
This reverts commit 66f2485.
7b712e4
to
a58c077
Compare
After #40574 it looks like #20467 is back:
Reproducible in maxima itself (but only in 5.48):
|
|
Mostly output format changes, but it is not trivial to make test pass with both old and new versions