On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:07:57AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
Which variant, A or B, would you prefere? I like B because the object you
want to eval is the term. And the only information sympy have to know
is the order of the symbols. And further you dont need to create a
new
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:23:39AM +0200, Friedrich Hagedorn wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:07:57AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
BTW, I think we should also implement the rest of the useful functions
from numpy in sympy as well -- it'd be useful to have it in pure
Then I think it
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 3:23 AM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:07:57AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
BTW, I think we should also implement the rest of the useful functions
from numpy in sympy as well -- it'd be useful to have it in pure
Then I
Hello again,
I have one more task for subs. Supose one have a term and a function
like this:
In [1]: fxy = f(x) + f(y)
In [2]: g = Lambda(x, x + x**2)
And now I want to do easily
In [4]: fxy.subs(f, g)
Out[4]: f(x) + f(y)
But I must do the cumbersone way
In [3]: fxy.subs(f(x),
Hello,
is there a variable to see the revision in the installed sympy module?
May be
[~] % isympy
Python 2.5.1 console for SymPy 0.5.13-hg
These commands were executed:
from __future__ import division
from sympy import *
x, y, z = symbols('xyz')
k, m, n = symbols('kmn', integer=True)
f
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:32:19AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:56:21PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
In [1]: Eq(z, ==, x/y)
Out[1]:
x
z = ─
y
Why does it make sense to cover all equalities and inequalities by
this one operator Eq? The present syntax is to me like spelling x*y+z
as Add(Add(x,'*',y), '+', z) Doesn't it make more sense to define
separate Eq, Ne, Lt, Le, Gt, Ge operators?
Fredrik
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 05:05:47PM +0400, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:32:19AM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 04:56:21PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
In
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:19:27PM +0200, Fredrik Johansson wrote:
Why does it make sense to cover all equalities and inequalities by
this one operator Eq? The present syntax is to me like spelling x*y+z
as Add(Add(x,'*',y), '+', z) Doesn't it make more sense to define
:-)
separate Eq,
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Fredrik Johansson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why does it make sense to cover all equalities and inequalities by
this one operator Eq? The present syntax is to me like spelling x*y+z
as Add(Add(x,'*',y), '+', z) Doesn't it make more sense to define
separate
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
is there a variable to see the revision in the installed sympy module?
May be
[~] % isympy
Python 2.5.1 console for SymPy 0.5.13-hg
These commands were executed:
from __future__ import
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:28:10PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello,
is there a variable to see the revision in the installed sympy module?
May be
[~] % isympy
Python 2.5.1 console for SymPy
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:24:33PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Fredrik Johansson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why does it make sense to cover all equalities and inequalities by
this one operator Eq? The present syntax is to me like spelling x*y+z
as
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:40:27PM +0200, Friedrich Hagedorn wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:28:10PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello,
is there a variable to see the revision in the installed
seems to work for me. Except the input [45], where you need to call
the function vectorize, e.g.:
In [1]: term = x + x**2
In [2]: f = Lambda(x, term)
In [3]: f(x)
Out[3]:
2
x + x
In [4]: f(2)
Out[4]: 6
But on the original term I get this:
In
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:08:06 +0200
Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
is there a variable to see the revision in the installed sympy module?
May be
[...]
In [1]: sympy.rev
-- cb530fab81c4
I think we can do something like this using mercurial's keyword
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:28:10PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello,
is there a variable to see the revision in
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:59:32PM +0200, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:58:31PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
However, how about this syntax:
In [18]: f = Lambda(x, term, evalf=True)
Or rather f = Lamdba(x, term, numerical=True)
The reason I say this is that the
Hi fred2 (what is your name, btw)!
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 10:36:46PM -0700, fred2 wrote:
Hello sympy experts,
I'm not an expert, but I'll try to answer some questions.
Thanks for making sympy available. it looks like a great package. i figured i
would put together a cookbook page for
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:59:32PM +0200, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:58:31PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
However, how about this syntax:
In [18]: f = Lambda(x, term, evalf=True)
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 05:09:07PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Friedrich Hagedorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:59:32PM +0200, Gael Varoquaux wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 03:58:31PM +0200, Ondrej Certik wrote:
However, how
Well, ufuncs? Looking at the sourcecode of the Function class, maybe
it's as easy as adding a line checking for a list and returning a list
of the function
applied element wise. Something similar could be done for Matrices, see
below.
I dont know the ufuncs. What is the idea
Hello,
this term manipulation with collect() is wrong:
In [1]: y*z**2 + z**2*x*y
Out[1]:
22
y*z + x*y*z
In [2]: collect(y*z**2 + z**2*x*y, y*z)
Out[2]:
2 2
y *z *(1 + x)
By,
Friedrich
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because
23 matches
Mail list logo
