  Rank: Administration Groups: Developers, Registered, Knovel Developers, Administrators, Advanced Member Joined: 11/07/2008(UTC) Posts: 1,617   Was thanked: 1981 time(s) in 667 post(s)
|
SMath Studio 0.98.5918 available - SS-125: Inserting Chinese symbols fixed;
- SS-2305: Situations when it was impossible to paste part of the equation into another equation fixed;
- SS-2280: Graphic glitch in Extension Manager form on plugin uninstall fixed;
- SS-2298: Exception on pressing Open button from Donate dialog fixed;
- SS-206: Unexpected worksheet scrolling on pressing Delete/Backspace when cursor is in the right part of equation fixed;
- SS-112: Fixed issues when it was impossible to open file because of incorrect color specified in file content;
- SS-35: Missing tooltips from side panel fixed;
- SS-51: Issue partially handled: behavior is correct in case of work with one collapsed area - space will be adjusted automatically;
- Implemented ability to specify printer name when printing from command prompt;
- Worksheet evaluation starts now on print or export from command prompt (required to update regions states to display them correctly).
Download
|
 9 users thanked Andrey Ivashov for this useful post.
|
on 15/03/2016(UTC), on 15/03/2016(UTC), on 15/03/2016(UTC), on 15/03/2016(UTC), on 15/03/2016(UTC), on 15/03/2016(UTC), on 15/03/2016(UTC), on 16/03/2016(UTC), on 16/03/2016(UTC)
|
|
|
  Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 22/02/2014(UTC)
Posts: 81
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 post(s)
|
 roots2polynomial.sm (16kb) downloaded 59 time(s).Hi Andrey, The worksheet in attachment doesn't work in 0.98, but works fine in 0.97. The error message is "s - not defined". It's bothering me, because of I've used the functions in several documents. Another issue is that new version 0.98 stays non-responsive for a few minutes when I try to quit SmathStudio. Best regards
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866  Was thanked: 983 time(s) in 811 post(s)
|
I'm incompetent wrt your long program w/o example. Nothing to see => nothing to do. Something to see, use the solve block ... Works fine J0, J1, Y0, Y1. Jean Bessel JY.sm (54kb) downloaded 56 time(s).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 983 time(s) in 811 post(s)
|
... for the cubic equation, there is in "Samples" a more robust "Cubic Solver" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 983 time(s) in 811 post(s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 17/01/2013(UTC) Posts: 296 Location: Khabarovsk, Russia Was thanked: 151 time(s) in 107 post(s)
|
 You seem to cheat using one-liners that depend on inner order of evaluation. It's not fixed, may change in any new version, so it's unsafe to do that. Also, you should keep in mind that evaluation defaults to symbolic; so in loops it's often advisable to use eval() to force SMath store direct value to a variable, instead if (sometimes very complex) recursive formula it had stacked up to this point. roots2polynomial-fixed.sm (17kb) downloaded 58 time(s). |
Best regards,
Mike Kaganski |
2 users thanked mikekaganski for this useful post.
|
on 16/03/2016(UTC), on 16/03/2016(UTC)
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 17/01/2013(UTC) Posts: 296 Location: Khabarovsk, Russia Was thanked: 151 time(s) in 107 post(s)
|
By the way, Andrey, could you please state on the following questions:
1. Currently, boolean operands are always evaluated regardless if it's already possible to deduce final result. E.g.: (x:=1)V(y:=5) will assign both x and y, despite it's enough to only calc left (or right) part to know the boolean result. Could you please confirm or refute that this will always be so (may I rely on this to create simple (not order-dependent) one-liners?).
2. Currently, boolean operands are evaluated from left to right. E.g.: (x:=1)V(eval(y:=x)) will make y to be 1, while (eval(y:=x))V(x:=1) will give an "Undefined" error. Could you please confirm or refute that this will always be so (may I rely on this to create complex (order-dependent) one-liners?).
Thank you for your work! |
Best regards,
Mike Kaganski |
1 user thanked mikekaganski for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration Groups: Developers, Registered, Knovel Developers, Administrators, Advanced Member Joined: 11/07/2008(UTC) Posts: 1,617 Was thanked: 1981 time(s) in 667 post(s)
|
Thank you for questions! Originally Posted by: tomtit  ...new version 0.98 stays non-responsive for a few minutes when I try to quit SmathStudio. I think it is because of some plug-in you have installed on your system. Try to close SMath Studio, then rename SMath folder to SMath_temp in %APPDATA%, then start SMath Studio again and try to close it to see how much time closing will take.  Originally Posted by: tomtit The error message is "s - not defined". It's bothering me, because of I've used the functions in several documents. It is because of the following string (in two places):  Starting from SMath Studio 0.98 application handles calculation parts from left to right when no other rules to follow. And it became a rule now which will remain the same in future. So you just need to change places for 1-st and 3-rd operations in your matrix:  Sorry for this, but before 0.98 order of operations in such cases was not actually strictly defined. Originally Posted by: mikekaganski You seem to cheat using one-liners that depend on inner order of evaluation. It's not fixed, may change in any new version, so it's unsafe to do that. Correction: it was unsafe. Now it is absolutely legal way to do such operations. A bit tricky, but legal. Originally Posted by: mikekaganski 1. Currently, boolean operands are always evaluated regardless if it's already possible to deduce final result. E.g.: (x:=1)V(y:=5) will assign both x and y, despite it's enough to only calc left (or right) part to know the boolean result. Could you please confirm or refute that this will always be so (may I rely on this to create simple (not order-dependent) one-liners?). Very good question! For some reason (ah, my stupid head) never thought about it. But later better then never... I just did corrections to boolean AND and OR and the final results you can see on the screenshot:  Originally Posted by: mikekaganski 2. Currently, boolean operands are evaluated from left to right. E.g.: (x:=1)V(eval(y:=x)) will make y to be 1, while (eval(y:=x))V(x:=1) will give an "Undefined" error. Could you please confirm or refute that this will always be so (may I rely on this to create complex (order-dependent) one-liners?). I think, answer is in the screenshot above. P.S.: I do realize that these changes may result in errors in some existing calculations, but we need to accept these new rules in order to be sure such issues will never appear again in future + rules of a game are now defined. Best regards! Edited by user 16 March 2016 20:07:13(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
5 users thanked Andrey Ivashov for this useful post.
|
on 16/03/2016(UTC), on 16/03/2016(UTC), on 16/03/2016(UTC), on 17/03/2016(UTC), on 17/03/2016(UTC)
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 22/02/2014(UTC)
Posts: 81
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 10 post(s)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 983 time(s) in 811 post(s)
|
Tom, You may want to try the more general Genfit. It is independent of Maple. In many cases, it works better than Mathcad 11, but more difficult to manipulate ... price to pay. Visit "Samples" => Genfit ... + examples. Jean Genfit Pharmacokinetics.sm (39kb) downloaded 60 time(s).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,866 Was thanked: 983 time(s) in 811 post(s)
|
... quick construct 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
