238:, the references to matlab and fortran are not that relevant either. But I don't like your argument that since the mathematica link is just as relevant as the matlab one, then since the matlab link is in, therefore the mathematica link must be in also. That paragraph was just mentioning a few implementations. It does not (and should not) be absolutely fair to and representative of all programming languages out there.
151:
There seems to be some misunderstanding of the categorization of
Mathematica as a Computer Algebra System. Wolfram has never described it as such, and while it does include computer algebra capabilities, to describe it as less of a numerical analysis package than Matlab and IDL which
99:
Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. –
156:
holds as prime examples is strictly misleading. It has the same core set of numerical features, at the same or faster performance. In addition it has extended precision arithmetic and error tracking which are important for numerical analysis and missing from those packages.
123:
Your links to mathematica and
Wolfram are not always very relevant, or not so helpful. It appears to me in some places you put them just because you could. I removed a bunch I thought were not so useful, and kept some which I thought belonged there (like the link in
202:
on my user talk page). Re root finding, numerical recipes is more than a solution provider: it also explains the algorithms and gives their implementation. Re absolute value, I'm afraid I don't quite understand your comment. Matlab is not mentioned in either the
214:
By the way, it would be helpful if you could sign your comments so that it's clear who said what. You can do this by typing four tildes ~~~~ after your comments. See
71:
129:
215:
178:
167:
is the
Mathematica home page is any less relevant than the numerical recipes homepage. Both are solution providers for that problem. On the
160:
Ref: Mark
Sofroniou,G. Spalett, Journal of Logic and Algebraic Programming,Year: 2005 , Volume: 64, Issue: 1,Page range: 113-134
190:
31:
Hello, and welcome on
Knowledge. While we encourage new users to join, I have to say that I don't see why you added a link to
36:
59:
243:
137:
105:
223:
70:
44:
77:
175:
the
Mathematica reference adds something in that it shows there are different types of implementation.
239:
198:
Regarding the first paragraph, Mathematica is used far less than Matlab for numerical work (see also
186:
133:
101:
17:
89:
153:
219:
81:
63:
40:
163:
I don't see the logic in the way that some software is presented and others note. eg Why on
125:
93:
182:
235:
172:
171:
page why is the Matlab reference useful and the
Mathematica reference not. Further, on
168:
211:
section, while I found three references to
Wolfram sites (though none to Mathematica).
164:
32:
247:
227:
141:
109:
48:
85:
39:. It does not seem particularly relevant to the article. --
199:
132:). You can reply here if you have comments. Thanks.
66:" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
8:
92:of users who are watching that article. See
130:Comparison of numerical analysis software
76:The text written here will appear on the
216:Knowledge:Sign your posts on talk pages
96:for full information on this feature.
7:
147:Response: Your links to Mathematica
35:to some of the maths articles like
24:
69:
62:there is a small field labeled "
60:editing an article on Knowledge
1:
248:16:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
228:13:06, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
142:16:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
110:16:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
49:01:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
37:partial differential equation
264:
119:Your links to Mathematica
54:Request for edit summary
181:comment was added by
82:page revision history
18:User talk:JonMcLoone
115:OK, I see that now
94:m:Help:Edit summary
154:numerical analysis
194:
27:Mathematica links
255:
218:for details. --
176:
126:QR decomposition
73:
263:
262:
258:
257:
256:
254:
253:
252:
240:Oleg Alexandrov
177:—The preceding
149:
134:Oleg Alexandrov
121:
102:Oleg Alexandrov
56:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
261:
259:
251:
250:
236:absolute value
231:
230:
212:
173:absolute value
169:absolute value
148:
145:
120:
117:
114:
78:Recent changes
55:
52:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
260:
249:
245:
241:
237:
233:
232:
229:
225:
221:
217:
213:
210:
206:
201:
197:
196:
195:
192:
188:
184:
180:
174:
170:
166:
161:
158:
155:
146:
144:
143:
139:
135:
131:
127:
118:
116:
112:
111:
107:
103:
97:
95:
91:
88:, and in the
87:
83:
80:page, in the
79:
74:
72:
67:
65:
61:
53:
51:
50:
46:
42:
38:
34:
26:
19:
220:Jitse Niesen
208:
204:
165:root finding
162:
159:
150:
122:
113:
98:
75:
68:
64:Edit summary
57:
41:Jitse Niesen
30:
33:Mathematica
209:References
200:my comment
183:JonMcLoone
90:watchlists
86:diff page
84:, on the
191:contribs
179:unsigned
207:or the
205:Notes
58:When
16:<
244:talk
224:talk
187:talk
138:talk
128:and
106:talk
45:talk
234:In
193:) .
246:)
226:)
189:•
140:)
108:)
47:)
242:(
222:(
185:(
136:(
104:(
43:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
