Re: [julia-users] Re: ANN: Symbolic computation with Julia

On Wednesday, January 28, 2015 at 5:53:00 PM UTC+1, lapeyre@gmail.com wrote: > > AC matching is a b$&%h. For me, there's no sense in continuing the > experiment unless I'm convinced the harder stuff can be done. > https://github.com/mathics/Mathics/blob/1a5cd204b76595730bdf4a91a6696a329215

Re: [julia-users] Re: ANN: Symbolic computation with Julia

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 12:34:43 PM UTC+1, John Lapeyre wrote: > > > I read that the next version of Rubi will feature a decision tree, no > longer pattern matching. > > Interesting. I don't see it, do you have a link? > https://github.com/sympy/sympy/issues/7749#issuecomment-54830230

Re: [julia-users] Re: ANN: Symbolic computation with Julia

On Tuesday, January 27, 2015 at 12:24:35 AM UTC+1, John Lapeyre wrote: > > To be more clear: First I think the ideas in this thread will be used > in Julia projects in interesting ways we aren't even thinking of--- > it's well suited for all of them. At the moment, I'm only interested in > implem

Re: [julia-users] Re: ANN: Symbolic computation with Julia

On Monday, January 26, 2015 at 6:57:48 PM UTC+1, James Crist wrote: > > > Side tracking a bit, but one of the reasons I use SymPy instead of > something like Maxima is that it meshes seamlessly into the language > infrastructure. By writing a parser and creating another system means that > it c

[julia-users] Re: ANN: Symbolic computation with Julia

On Monday, January 26, 2015 at 6:11:33 PM UTC+1, lapeyre@gmail.com wrote: > > > Another resource is Richard Fateman's mma4max > , which I see has > updates since I last built it. It aims more or less to implement mma in > common lisp. In

[julia-users] Re: ANN: Symbolic computation with Julia

On Monday, January 26, 2015 at 6:11:33 PM UTC+1, lapeyre@gmail.com wrote: > > I found that I can progress most quickly modeling on Mathematica. The > design is fairly simple and consistent. Of course the documentation is > vague in some places, but so far, it is not a problem. Of course, e

[julia-users] Re: julia literals for bittypes

memory I will have to systematically use convert. On Friday, 5 December 2014 12:17:56 UTC+1, Francesco wrote: > > When I write: > > julia> x = 3 > > I assign to x a Int64 by default. > > julia> typeof(x) > Int64 > > Let say that 3 should be Uint8, then I writ

[julia-users] julia literals for bittypes

When I write: julia> x = 3 I assign to x a Int64 by default. julia> typeof(x) Int64 Let say that 3 should be Uint8, then I write: julia> x = convert(Uint8, 3) Is there a more idiomatic way of doing it? Maybe with literals?

Re: [julia-users] [Offtopic:] Why you did choose the name "Julia"?

The problem with the name Julia is that you find a lot of other stuff unrelated to programming when you look on Google.

[julia-users] Silhouette width

Hi all, I am new to Julia. I searched a bit but I did not find anything related to the silhouette (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silhouette_(clustering)) .. Do you know if there is something about it? Thanks, Francesco

[julia-users] Re: ANN: Shannon.jl

> > The Shannon.jl package is licensed under GNU General Public License, > version 3 > Pretty restrictive

Re: [julia-users] Re: Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics

By the way, getting back to the topic, concerning classical mechanics, there is a good implementation in SymPy (BSD 3-clause license), have a look http://docs.sympy.org/dev/modules/physics/mechanics/ It could be already experimented in Julia via PyCall: using PyCall @pyimport sympy.physics.mech

Re: [julia-users] Re: Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:49:50 PM UTC+2, Erik Schnetter wrote: > > > No, they only know the types with which the function is called. In > general, the types of new expressions that are generated cannot be > known until they are evaluated. > I'm wondering about some construction like th

Re: [julia-users] Re: Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 3:07:48 PM UTC+2, Erik Schnetter wrote: > > (1) Staged functions are evaluated when the function's types are > known. They are somewhat in between macros and functions, but still > operate on expressions instead of values. > > Are staged functions able to get the w

Re: [julia-users] Re: Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics

On Friday, October 10, 2014 3:44:53 PM UTC, Erik Schnetter wrote: > > > What do you mean by "constructor for symbolic manipulation"? Julia > does support symbolic manipulation; this is e.g. used in macros, and > there is a class "Expr" that holds unevaluated expressions. However, > there are n

Re: [julia-users] congratulations to Indian dost

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 5:44:42 PM UTC+2, Isaiah wrote: > > Since we're off the ranch anyway, the brochure is a neat read: > > http://www.isro.gov.in/pslv-c25/pdf/pslv-c25-brochure.pdf > > (the MAR1750 processor is a 16-bit ISA from 1980, implemented in a > radiation-hardened package an

[julia-users] Re: how to check if an variable is defined?

Maybe something like this: julia> isdefined(:a) false julia> a = 3 3 julia> isdefined(:a) true On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 8:31:04 AM UTC+2, K leo wrote: > > Hope to avoid the following: > > julia> s > ERROR: s not defined > > I guess this may be simple, but I don't know where to find.

Re: [julia-users] Does Julia have something similar to Python's documentation string?

On Monday, September 15, 2014 9:39:19 AM UTC+2, Rafael Fourquet wrote: > > Docile.jl looks great, but I think that the API should be made into >> comments. One of Julia's goals is to have a simple syntax that even people >> who are not acquainted with programming can easily understand. >> > > P

Re: [julia-users] Does Julia have something similar to Python's documentation string?

On Saturday, September 13, 2014 2:26:18 AM UTC+2, Michael Hatherly wrote: > > Hi Francesco, > > Docile.jl partially covers what I think you're wanting out of your > docstrings, namely testing examples for correctness. I've been thinking > about exporting the do

Re: [julia-users] Does Julia have something similar to Python's documentation string?

Given my experience with Python's docstrings, I wish there could be an easy way to execute the docstring examples inside the REPL, especially when they are of the form: """ >>> some-code return-value """ If the documentation is an object, and not a string, the *return-value* could be g

Re: [julia-users] Re: Why is string concatenation done with * not +

On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 9:48:26 PM UTC+2, John Myles White wrote: > > String concatenation is not commutative. Addition is generally used for > commutative operations. So if you're a mathematician, using addition for > string concatentation seems very wrong. > In Wolfram Mathematica there i

[julia-users] Type declaration problem

Hi, I saw in Julia's tutorial about this: julia> function foo() x::Int8 = 1000 x end foo (generic function with 1 method) julia> foo() -24 julia> typeof(ans) Int8 I tried the type declaration in a terminal, in the main scope (not inside a function), and I got: julia>