Oh, and I see you're a sympy developer! I hope I'm not coming across
as critical in any way. I love that sympy exists and thought it was a
really cool project when I first learned about what it can do.
Perhaps we should move our discussion to a "Github discussion" under
the sympy Github?
We
On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 6:28 AM Oscar Benjamin
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 at 10:53, Neil Girdhar wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 5:39 AM Oscar Benjamin
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 at 05:16, Neil Girdhar wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Oscar,
> > > >
> > > > The problem that the
On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 at 10:53, Neil Girdhar wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 5:39 AM Oscar Benjamin
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 at 05:16, Neil Girdhar wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Oscar,
> > >
> > > The problem that the original poster was trying to address with
> > > additional syntax is the
On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 5:39 AM Oscar Benjamin
wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 at 05:16, Neil Girdhar wrote:
> >
> > Hi Oscar,
> >
> > The problem that the original poster was trying to address with
> > additional syntax is the automatic naming of symbols. He wants to
> > omit this line:
> >
> > x
On Tue, 1 Jun 2021 at 05:16, Neil Girdhar wrote:
>
> Hi Oscar,
>
> The problem that the original poster was trying to address with
> additional syntax is the automatic naming of symbols. He wants to
> omit this line:
>
> x = symbols("x")
>
> You're right that if you have many one-character
On Mon, 31 May 2021 at 13:10, Neil Girdhar wrote:
>
> Have you considered using the JAX library's trick of decorating functions to
> provide automatic symbols?
>
> For example, your problem could be done in current Python with an
> appropriately-coded library:
>
> @symbolic
> def f(x, a, b, c):
Have you considered using the JAX library's trick of decorating functions
to provide automatic symbols?
For example, your problem could be done in current Python with an
appropriately-coded library:
@symbolic
def f(x, a, b, c):
return a * x ** 2 + b * x + c
sentinel = Sentinel()
> Although nothing in Python prevents defining __eq__() how you want and
> having it return other values can still be problematic to do so
> because of the way that __eq__() is tied to __hash__() and used in
> dicts and sets.
I think, this can work if you guarantee there are no hash collisions.
On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 13:31, Sergey B Kirpichev wrote:
>
> > >>> solve(x**2 == 1/2)
> > as you might notice, this is fully legal Python syntax. Unfortunately
> > the semantics is such that sympy has no way to determine what is
> > actually going on, this is why they invented all those helper
> >
> >>> solve(x**2 == 1/2)
> >>>
> >>>
> as you might notice, this is fully legal Python syntax. Unfortunately
>
On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:49:13PM -, Joren wrote:
> It's unfortunate that there is no way to have e.g. `'spam' in
> my_symbolic_set` evaluate to something else than a boolean. Also, this
> approach will not work with everything else for which there is no
> dunder method, e.g.
Aside from the type conversion dunders (e.g. `__bool__`), and the `and`, `or`
and `in` operators, this is possible right now:
You can create a `Symbol` class that returns another `Symbol` in the compatible
operator dunder methods, while internally maintaining a list of (operator,
args,
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 07:41, Martin Teichmann
wrote:
>
> Hi list,
>
> as you might have noticed, I am trying to improve the syntax and semantics
> for symbolic math in Python. Until now, I have to say, my ideas were not that
> well received, but I learned from the discussion and maybe this
People always come up with hacks like Ir. Robert Vanden Eynde has come up with
the vertical bar hack. This is why I feel there's no need to have additional
performance decrease and new syntax only to solve a little problem that occurs
in some third party like sympy.
> Oh no, not the vertical bar hack. :-(
This is my first time seeing the vertical bar hack. I guess this is
something that has appeared before?
- DLD
___
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
Oh no, not the vertical bar hack. :-(
___
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
> solve(x**2 == 1/2)
pip install funcoperators
>>> solve(x ** 2 |Equals| 1/2)
<<< Equals = infix(Eq)
<<< from sympy import Eq
Le mer. 19 mai 2021 à 08:40, Martin Teichmann
a écrit :
> Hi list,
>
> as you might have noticed, I am trying to improve the syntax and semantics
> for symbolic math
SUB
Hello everyone, what is the usual way to "like" a mail in the maillist and
subscribing to the thread ?
By sending a message it adds me to the "Participants" in the webapp which
is neat (I can then search for my messages)
I could do it in the webapp but not everybody will see it
Le mer. 19
> To frame the problem, let us try to solve the equation x ** 2 == 1/2
> using sympy:
>
> >>> from sympy import Eq, solve, symbols, S
> >>> x = symbols("x")
> >>> solve(Eq(x**2, S(1)/2))
> [-sqrt(2)/2, sqrt(2)/2]
>
> that worked well, but actually we would like to write the
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 8:14 AM Ricky Teachey wrote:
> It's a neat idea but I agree with the others that as proposed, it's
> probably too focused on turning python into a better mathematics tool,
> rather than turning python into a better programming language.
>
> That being said, from a more
I'm +1 on the idea but -1 on the proposed syntax. Yes it would be kind of nice
*but* it's not how Python arithmetic or grammar works. And why should Python
have that functionality? AFAICT Python doesn't have a module in stdlib for
symbolic math. This looks like a feature request to third party
It's a neat idea but I agree with the others that as proposed, it's
probably too focused on turning python into a better mathematics tool,
rather than turning python into a better programming language.
That being said, from a more generalist standpoint I wonder if it would be
useful in many
Martin wrote:
as you might have noticed, I am trying to improve the syntax and semantics
> for symbolic math in Python. Until now, I have to say, my ideas were not
> that well received, but I learned from the discussion and maybe this time I
> come up with something people like.
>
For about 10
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 07:41, Martin Teichmann
wrote:
> that worked well, but actually we would like to write the last line simply as
>
> >>> solve(x**2 == 1/2)
>
> as you might notice, this is fully legal Python syntax. Unfortunately the
> semantics is such that sympy has no way to
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 07:41, Martin Teichmann
wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> To frame the problem, let us try to solve the equation x ** 2 == 1/2
> using sympy:
>
> >>> from sympy import Eq, solve, symbols, S
> >>> x = symbols("x")
> >>> solve(Eq(x**2, S(1)/2))
> [-sqrt(2)/2, sqrt(2)/2]
25 matches
Mail list logo
