This one asks for something trickier, and more difficult to ask for. If you are not quite sure where to post, then you should put it in the wish list. Here, you should document use cases for Maple (the complete system) which should 'just work', but for some reason doesn't. What is a use case? It is a description of a task that needs to be done, which should be a straightforward application of Maple. It belongs here if it turns out that it is not straightforward (or worse). The bulk of the posts should be about those task descriptions. Suggested solutions should, in most cases, be omitted. This is where we should put our trust in the developers to come up with a good way to solve the problem, rather than to try to micro-manage.

Please use replies to this blog post for free-form wish list items for Maple 12. Anything you'd like to see, in any part of Maple, go for it.

It's time for maple users here to really start thinking about Maple 12. What, you say, Maple 11 just came out, I barely know what's in it, give me some time! Well, no. Think about it: what are the developers doing? They are most certainly sitting idle. They finished Maple 11 some time back, so starting some time ago, they started planning Maple 12. So if mapleprimes users are quick enough, they might still be able to influence what goes into Maple 12. Ok, there are really two methods to go about asking for Maple 12 features:

1. Wish list: the usual laundry lists of I want X

This workshop is a part of Calculemus 2007, Hagenberg, Austria.

The intent of this workshop is to examine more closely the intersection between programming languages and mechanized mathematics systems (MMS). By MMS, we understand computer algebra systems (CAS), [automated] theorem provers (TP/ATP), all heading towards the development of fully unified systems (the MMS), sometimes also called universal mathematical assistant systems (MAS) (see Calculemus 2007).

Just came across and interesting blog post on language design, focusing on the architecture versus features dimension. Trying to place Maple on this, it pretty much has to co-exist with Perl in the Pragmatic column. For comparisons' sake, one would have to place Mathematica in the Consistent column. The arrow of time graph is quite interesting. Maple is firmly a 'mature platform'. Whether it is 'bloated' is a very subjective call at this point; people of a more minimalist bent would certainly say so, but compared to something like Perl or C++, it most definitely is not. However, it is rather inevitable that it will become bloated: Maplesoft needs to push out new versions for people to upgrade to, and to be able to sell those, 'new' features have to be there to warrant an upgrade, right?