On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Aaron S. Meurer wrote:
> A bit of background, since you don't know. I worked on SymPy for GSoC last
> summer on the ODE solving module. I decided to continue as a developer
> afterwords, and I hope to apply again this year (though I need to come up
> with a proj
A bit of background, since you don't know. I worked on SymPy for GSoC last
summer on the ODE solving module. I decided to continue as a developer
afterwords, and I hope to apply again this year (though I need to come up with
a project idea first. If I can't, I might try to be a mentor). I am
Hi Fabian!
thanks for your thoughts. Some comments below:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:10 AM, Fabian Pedregosa wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> Since some of you are willing to improve the logic and assumption
> system, I'll just say my opinion on the current state of these modules.
>
> The logic framework (
Hey Fabian (et al),
Thanks for the summary here on the assumption system -- I was going to ask
for exactly this later tonight ;).
I'm definitely interested in working on this for SoC. My long-term goal is
to be a regular contributer to sympy.logic, and until just recently I had no
idea how dee
So surely between merging out the old assumptions, adding scalability and
performance enhancements, and improving the API, we could make another GSoC
project out of this, if anyone is interested. Even if these things only take
half the summer, the rest of the time could be spent adding new assum
Asaf,
> We can certainly change the openket licence, nonetheless I believe
> that by taking advantage of sympy we'll use most of the ideas of
> opeket but only rewritten pieces of the code. Either way I'll ask my
> friend to change it.
Cool, even if we don't use much of the code, this will enable
Hi all.
Since some of you are willing to improve the logic and assumption
system, I'll just say my opinion on the current state of these modules.
The logic framework (sympy.logic) in my opinion is ok. Sure, it could be
improved with quantifiers (first-order logic) and other niceties, but
overal
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:06 PM, tristrain wrote:
> Thanks a lot, that does get me started.
>
> Although it seems that by defining the length of the array as n = 10
> rather than being a variable (or SymPy "Symbol"?) makes a bit tricky
> to interpret the output as a generic f'(xn) function.
Well
