Revision history [back]

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this correspond to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified as the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a long collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket should be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this correspond corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified as the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a long collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket should be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified as with the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a long collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket should be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified with the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a long collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket should can be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified with the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a long collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket can be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified with the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket can be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified with the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket can be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified with the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket can be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

EDIT: added ticket #24008.

thanks for reporting :)

actually when you do integrate(...), Maxima is used: there is no such "Sage integrator". this corresponds to what you observed.

the backend doing the symbolic integrator can be conveniently specified with the algorithm keyword, as in integrate(exp(arccos(x)),x,0,1, algorithm='giac'), etc.

there is a collection of integrals that are wrong in the symbolics wiki. it should be checked if yours is reported there (i didn't check yet), and if it isn't then a new ticket can be created, possibly with an upstream report (Maxima).

EDIT: i've added ticket #24008. thanks for reporting :)