The rest is cosmetics.

In the mind of most physicists that I know, if Mathematica can do, and Maple cannot do, some calculation (like this integral) that they need at that moment, Maple is out. Almost certainly,  if Mathematica does the job, nobody would loose time writing its own routine. I am not particularly interested in this kind of integrals.

I know this for experience as I have received myself many times requests of similar kind.

Numerical integration and special functions are areas of particular interest to many physicists where Maple has been behind Mathematica.

The rest is cosmetics.

In the mind of most physicists that I know, if Mathematica can do, and Maple cannot do, some calculation (like this integral) that they need at that moment, Maple is out. Almost certainly,  if Mathematica does the job, nobody would loose time writing its own routine. I am not particularly interested in this kind of integrals.

I know this for experience as I have received myself many times requests of similar kind.

Numerical integration and special functions are areas of particular interest to many physicists where Maple has been behind Mathematica.

I wonder why 'mathfunc' fails in some cases, eg:

lf:=[bernoulli, euler, ilog2, unwindK]:
seq([lf[i],type(lf[i],mathfunc)],i=1..nops(lf));

[bernoulli, false], [euler, false], [ilog2, false], [unwindK, false]

Ie, is there a list or something like that where they are included by hand, and some functions are missed?
 

I wonder why 'mathfunc' fails in some cases, eg:

lf:=[bernoulli, euler, ilog2, unwindK]:
seq([lf[i],type(lf[i],mathfunc)],i=1..nops(lf));

[bernoulli, false], [euler, false], [ilog2, false], [unwindK, false]

Ie, is there a list or something like that where they are included by hand, and some functions are missed?
 

seems to be the way.

So, how do you get the numerical integration of the first example made at times similar (or smaller) than Mathematica, if the answer was "Our development team will work to address this weakness for an upcoming release of Maple.”?

So, how do you get the numerical integration of the first example made at times similar (or smaller) than Mathematica, if the answer was "Our development team will work to address this weakness for an upcoming release of Maple.”?

A curiosity.

In the right column of this Bitwise review I see right now four Google adds. The first two are for WRI Mathematica (MathModelica, Mathematica 5) while the second two are not  for  MapleSoft Maple (Maple Bed, Maple Restaurants) .

Google adds change with time but this sends a message also.

A curiosity.

In the right column of this Bitwise review I see right now four Google adds. The first two are for WRI Mathematica (MathModelica, Mathematica 5) while the second two are not  for  MapleSoft Maple (Maple Bed, Maple Restaurants) .

Google adds change with time but this sends a message also.

is what are looking for?

foldl( `and`, true, a, b, c );
                                a and b and c

it is much better 'multiseries'

with(MultiSeries):
multiseries(add(k*x^((k-1)/2),k=0..8),x,3,'exact_order'); 

it is much better 'multiseries'

with(MultiSeries):
multiseries(add(k*x^((k-1)/2),k=0..8),x,3,'exact_order'); 

I have always thought that a combination of a simple GUI like that of Maple V Release 2 or 3 with the current version of the kernel and library would be a very interesting combination. Ie something more confortable than the Command line UI but using less resources than Classic GUI.

In my experience, that simple GUI was very stable (as far as Windows 3.1 allowed).  Classic  is  not so stable.

That combination might be useful for improved performance while in a GUI: old machines, portable devices or cheaper individual versions.

Since it was released (in Maple 9.5, I think), ?MultiSeries contains this same warning:

The MultiSeries package is still under development. It is very likely that the functionality will change in the next release of Maple. Thus code using this package may not be backwards compatible with the next release of Maple.

I am not aware of another package displaying a similar warning, though I think that there are several packages in active development, with changes in functionality from one release to the next.

So, what is so much different with 'MultiSeries' that deserves this warning?

Since it was released (in Maple 9.5, I think), ?MultiSeries contains this same warning:

The MultiSeries package is still under development. It is very likely that the functionality will change in the next release of Maple. Thus code using this package may not be backwards compatible with the next release of Maple.

I am not aware of another package displaying a similar warning, though I think that there are several packages in active development, with changes in functionality from one release to the next.

So, what is so much different with 'MultiSeries' that deserves this warning?