Okay.
On Saturday, January 13, 2024 at 2:22:51 AM UTC+5:30 Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Friday 12 January 2024 at 14:50:54 UTC-5 Ruchit Jagodara wrote:
>
> Okay, so I will make a new function named coefficient_monomials and will
> implement the functionality that Lorenz Panny suggested.
> Thank you
On Friday 12 January 2024 at 14:50:54 UTC-5 Ruchit Jagodara wrote:
Okay, so I will make a new function named coefficient_monomials and will
implement the functionality that Lorenz Panny suggested.
Thank you for your help : ) .
I think "coefficients_monomials" is a little clearer. (
Okay, so I will make a new function named coefficient_monomials and will
implement the functionality that Lorenz Panny suggested.
Thank you for your help : ) .
On Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 8:16:25 PM UTC+5:30 Nils Bruin wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 January 2024 at 03:03:09 UTC-8 Martin R
On Wednesday 10 January 2024 at 03:03:09 UTC-8 Martin R wrote:
... What would be a good name? Brainstorming: `coefficient_system`,
`coefficients`, `coefficients_monomials`,
`coefficient_matrix_monomial_vector`...
I think coefficients_monomials() is the most descriptive, as it tells you
what
How about .linearize()?
(I think this method should also optionally take a list
of monomials as an argument, since there are situations
in which users would like to force their own ordering.
Returning the same monomial vector again would then of
course be redundant, so in that case the method
I like this idea much better! What would be a good name? Brainstorming:
`coefficient_system`, `coefficients`, `coefficients_monomials`,
`coefficient_matrix_monomial_vector`...
On Wednesday 10 January 2024 at 09:06:36 UTC+1 Nils Bruin wrote:
> deprecation in a way that allows code to be
deprecation in a way that allows code to be adapted gradually would mean:
- introduce a new method with a different name that implements the desired
behaviour
- deprecate old method
- after appropriate deprecation period remove old method
- possibly, at this point introduce the now-vacated
