[sympy] Re: Assumptions

FWIW, I think vinzent's approach (local assumptions automatically injected into the context of the symbol creation) is the best way to go. On 1 Mai, 07:47, Ondrej Certik wrote: > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Haz wrote: > > So a few things to respond to... > > Tom: > >>Can you describe what

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

Le samedi 30 avril 2011 à 23:47 -0700, Ondrej Certik a écrit : > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Haz wrote: > > So a few things to respond to... > > Tom: > >>Can you describe what went wrong with these branches? In particular, > >>why can the following naive strategy not work: > >> > >>1. Make t

[sympy] Re: Assumptions

On May 1, 8:47 am, Ondrej Certik wrote: > I am still very much convinced, that this disconnect-assumptions-2 is > the simplest and easiest way to get rid of the old assumptions, so > that we can start speeding up the core, and start using some other > system for them. I'm not convinced, because i

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

> > > There was push-back from the community since removing the > > Symbol('x', positive=True) syntax was largely frowned upon. > > As I recall, the problems were that it was slow and broke a lot of > things. Symbol(x, positive=True) is easy to hack back in. > The speed degradation was primari

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

The cache issue runs deeper -- variable x, that depends on variably y, may simplify to something that doesn't even involve y because of the assumptions that come with y. In this case, a result is stored for x that is only valid under the right assumptions for y, and we would need to be very caref

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

> > > I would be interested in the community vote on this idea. I vote +1. I > > am aware that Ronan voted -1 last year. What do others think? > > What are you voting +1 on, concretely? Your branch is one year old, so > it would have to be updated. There were also many test failures > remaining and

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

Le dimanche 01 mai 2011 à 11:37 -0400, Haz a écrit : > The idea is to write '~Q.real(x)' instead of 'Assume(x, > Q.real, False)'. > It's shorter, easier to understand and doesn't suggest wrongly > that > creating the object does anything beyond that. > > >

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Vinzent Steinberg wrote: > On May 1, 8:47 am, Ondrej Certik wrote: >> I am still very much convinced, that this disconnect-assumptions-2 is >> the simplest and easiest way to get rid of the old assumptions, so >> that we can start speeding up the core, and start us

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Ronan Lamy wrote: > Le samedi 30 avril 2011 à 23:47 -0700, Ondrej Certik a écrit : >> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Haz wrote: >> > So a few things to respond to... >> > Tom: >> >>Can you describe what went wrong with these branches? In particular, >> >>why can

Re: [sympy] Re: SymPy Bot

On Apr 30, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Vinzent Steinberg > wrote: >> On Apr 30, 11:59 pm, Ondrej Certik wrote: >>> Well, that would not be the biggest problem. The biggest problem is >>> that gist doesn't have API for uploading yet, see here: >>> >

[sympy] matrix doctest failure

I've made modifications in https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/267 When I run the matrices.txt file alone all tests pass. When I run the full doctest suite I get the failure below for QR decomposition. When I shut caching off and run the suite, it passes. How can caching give a wrong answer? It'

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

Hi. Can everyone add these ideas to that wiki page? So there should be global assumptions, local assumptions, etc., with links to the relevant branches, and explanations of the idea, the pros, the cons, etc. I think it will be a lot easier to just read through the wiki page whenever we make a

Re: [sympy] Re: SymPy Bot

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Aaron S. Meurer wrote: > On Apr 30, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Vinzent Steinberg >> wrote: >>> On Apr 30, 11:59 pm, Ondrej Certik wrote: Well, that would not be the biggest problem. The biggest problem is >>

Re: [sympy] Re: SymPy Bot

On May 1, 2011, at 12:44 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Aaron S. Meurer wrote: >> On Apr 30, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Vinzent Steinberg >>> wrote: On Apr 30, 11:59 pm, Ondrej Certik wrote: > Well, tha

[sympy] Re: Assumptions

On 30 Apr., 23:41, "Aaron S. Meurer" wrote: > On Apr 30, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Ronan Lamy wrote: > > > > > Le samedi 30 avril 2011 à 13:36 -0400, Haz a écrit : > >> So a few things to respond to... > > >> Tom: > >>> Can you describe what went wrong with these branches? In particular, > >>> why can t

[sympy] Re: Assumptions

On 1 Mai, 16:40, Haz wrote: >   The cache issue runs deeper -- variable x, that depends on variably y, may > simplify to something that doesn't even involve y because of the assumptions > that come with y. In this case, a result is stored for x that is only valid > under the right assumptions for

[sympy] Re: Assumptions

On 1 Mai, 16:55, Ronan Lamy wrote: > Le dimanche 01 mai 2011 à 11:37 -0400, Haz a écrit : > > >         The idea is to write '~Q.real(x)' instead of 'Assume(x, > >         Q.real, False)'. > >         It's shorter, easier to understand and doesn't suggest wrongly > >         that > >         creat

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

On May 1, 2011, at 1:35 PM, Tom Bachmann wrote: > On 1 Mai, 16:40, Haz wrote: >> The cache issue runs deeper -- variable x, that depends on variably y, may >> simplify to something that doesn't even involve y because of the assumptions >> that come with y. In this case, a result is stored for

[sympy] Re: Merging the gruntz fixes

I know we are all busy, and many others also have commits in the queue, but what is the status of the review of my branch(es)? The gruntz_eval branch is rebased over master (at time of this writing) and ready to go or in or be further discussed. On 29 Apr., 00:54, Ondrej Certik wrote: > On Thu,

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

> > > The example may sound contrived, but it does arise in practice, and was > a > > headache to debug. > > > > Well there must be an end to it, right? Every assumption is about > symbols. Every symbol x that depends in any way on another symbol y > has y in its free_symbols. In fact any exrpess

[sympy] Re: Assumptions

On 1 Mai, 20:45, Haz wrote: > > >   The example may sound contrived, but it does arise in practice, and was > > a > > > headache to debug. > > > Well there must be an end to it, right? Every assumption is about > > symbols. Every symbol x that depends in any way on another symbol y > > has y in it

Re: [sympy] Re: SymPy Bot

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Aaron S. Meurer wrote: > > On May 1, 2011, at 12:44 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > >> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Aaron S. Meurer wrote: >>> On Apr 30, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Vinzent Steinberg wrote

Re: [sympy] Re: Merging the gruntz fixes

Hi Tom, On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tom Bachmann wrote: > I know we are all busy, and many others also have commits in the > queue, but what is the status of the review of my branch(es)? > > The gruntz_eval branch is rebased over master (at time of this > writing) and ready to go or in or be

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Tom Bachmann wrote: > > > On 30 Apr., 23:41, "Aaron S. Meurer" wrote: >> On Apr 30, 2011, at 1:24 PM, Ronan Lamy wrote: >> >> >> >> > Le samedi 30 avril 2011 à 13:36 -0400, Haz a écrit : >> >> So a few things to respond to... >> >> >> Tom: >> >>> Can you describe

Re: [sympy] Re: Merging the gruntz fixes

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tom Bachmann wrote: >> I know we are all busy, and many others also have commits in the >> queue, but what is the status of the review of my branch(es)? >> >> The gruntz_eval branch is rebased over

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

This is the chunk that things get done in: - https://github.com/sympy/sympy/blob/master/sympy/core/cache.py#L75 Have a global variable called working, and a local variable called first. Put this at the top of wrapper: first = F

[sympy] Re: Merging the gruntz fixes

Done. [Sorry I did not re-run the tests ...] On 1 Mai, 21:18, Ondrej Certik wrote: > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Ondrej Certik wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Tom Bachmann > > wrote: > >> I know we are all busy, and many others also have commits in the > >> queue

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

On May 1, 2011, at 2:40 PM, Haz wrote: > This is the chunk that things get done in: > - https://github.com/sympy/sympy/blob/master/sympy/core/cache.py#L75 > > Have a global variable called working, and a local variable called first. > Put this at the top of wrapper: > > first = False > > if

[sympy] Re: Assumptions

On 1 Mai, 11:37, Haz wrote: >   The non-trivial queries are broken up, and non-trivial facts are compiled > and stored (the lookup isn't just on the facts we input, but on the facts > that can be derived). Having a good example of a query that the old > assumption system can perform (and the new o

Re: [sympy] Assumptions

The correctness of any algorithm should be unaffected by the cache -- so you would only see a (time) difference if repeated sympy commands use the cached results. On Sunday, May 1, 2011, Aaron S. Meurer wrote: > > On May 1, 2011, at 2:40 PM, Haz wrote: > This is the chunk that things get done >

[sympy] Re: Assumptions

On 1 Mai, 18:36, Ondrej Certik wrote: > There is some misunderstanding (possibly on my side): I thought that > the branch has removed the assumptions completely, thus it uses no > assumptions. Then the idea was to use *local* assumptions, by using > the Assume class. > > Can you clarify what you m

[sympy] Re: SymPy Bot

On 1 Mai, 22:02, Ondrej Certik wrote: > The webserver needs to serve the page with content type "html", > instead of "txt". That should do it. Couldn't we just create a github webpage and let sympy-bot automatically push to it? Vinzent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

Le dimanche 01 mai 2011 à 09:43 -0700, Ondrej Certik a écrit : > On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Ronan Lamy wrote: > > Le samedi 30 avril 2011 à 23:47 -0700, Ondrej Certik a écrit : > >> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Haz wrote: > >> > So a few things to respond to... > >> > Tom: > >> >>Can yo

Re: [sympy] Re: SymPy Bot

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Vinzent Steinberg wrote: > On 1 Mai, 22:02, Ondrej Certik wrote: >> The webserver needs to serve the page with content type "html", >> instead of "txt". That should do it. > > Couldn't we just create a github webpage and let sympy-bot > automatically push to it? F

Re: [sympy] Re: Assumptions

On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Ronan Lamy wrote: > Le dimanche 01 mai 2011 à 09:43 -0700, Ondrej Certik a écrit : >> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Ronan Lamy wrote: >> > Le samedi 30 avril 2011 à 23:47 -0700, Ondrej Certik a écrit : >> >> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Haz wrote: >> >> > S