On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:38:10 -0700 (PDT) Jason Merrill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sep 17, 12:37 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Jason, > > > > Just a heads up -- your code above is going to become pointless > > when we switch to using Ginac as a backend for symbolic > > manipulation, since Sage will no longer keep its own expression > > tree. > > Thanks for the heads up. The code above would be "pointless" even if > Ginac weren't in the pipeline--it's surely full of holes. The point > was just to try to get a working version of the idea across. Once the > Ginac code lands, will there be a way to represent formal > integration? Could there be? Would it look like this, or would you > want it to? There will be a way to represent formal integration and summation. I believe avoiding automatic simplification of arbitrary expressions requires more work (I haven't checked this yet.), but even that shouldn't be too complicated. This is on my todo list though. Did you manage to build the pynac package? If not, I can post a modified version which should build in your environment so you can start playing with the new code. Cheers, Burcin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
