Comment #1 on issue 3046 by smi...@gmail.com: divmod method needed for
Rational
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3046
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1054
When divmod(2, S(3)) is called, Python passes the call off to
Integer.__rdivmod__ because S(3) is an Integer. The
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview smichr
Comment #2 on issue 3046 by smi...@gmail.com: divmod method needed for
Rational
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3046
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #1 on issue 3036 by asmeu...@gmail.com: sympy-bot hangs
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3036
This seems to work now. I'm not certain, but I think Ronan's pytest branch
may have fixed it (that pull request is where I first noticed it
Comment #3 on issue 3074 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Countable Probability Space
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3074
I went ahead and added Statistics as an official label in the tracker.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues
Comment #27 on issue 2624 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Sympy 0.7.1 can't
integrate Gaussians
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2624
I guess it's because of the gcd behavior on rationals:
In [64]: gcd(1, S.Half)
Out[64]: 1/2
You have to use Mul(evaluate=False). See issue 1497.
--
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3077 by waks...@gwax.com: solve cannot solve for variables used
as logarithm base
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3077
Goal: solve log(9,x) == 2
Expected answer: x = 3
from sympy import *
x = Symbol('x')
Comment #1 on issue 3077 by waks...@gwax.com: solve cannot solve for
variables used as logarithm base
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3077
I have just checked against solve in the repository and this issue seems to
have been resolved.
--
You received this message because
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium NeedsReview smichr
New issue 3076 by smi...@gmail.com: nan**0 should be nan
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3076
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1054
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
Comment #27 on issue 2624 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Sympy 0.7.1 can't
integrate Gaussians
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2624
I guess it's because of the gcd behavior on rationals:
In [64]: gcd(1, S.Half)
Out[64]: 1/2
You have to use Mul(evaluate=False). See issue 1497.
--
I am an undergraduate student currently doing my Masters in
Physics and will be doing my B.E in Computer Science next year. I had
done courses on quantum mechanics and I am comfortable to code in
Python.I would very much like to be part of GSOC 2012 for SymPy.
I was going through the 'Project
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 7:49 PM, someone someb...@bluewin.ch wrote:
Hi,
Heads up: that's a pretty tough one. But if you do feel that you
are up to it, it would be a great thing to have.
The fact that it's a tough one only makes me feel more
interested :-) Here
Note that internally, the expression actually is expressed this way:
In [54]: print S(x1^-1*x2^-1).args
(1/x1, 1/x2)
In [55]: srepr(S(x1^-1*x2^-1))
Out[55]: Mul(Pow(Symbol('x1'), Integer(-1)), Pow(Symbol('x2'), Integer(-1)))
It's only the printer that represents it as 1/(x1*x2), which is done
Thank you. Is there a way to create a non-commutative expression
*directly* from a string? To be specific, if I write something like
ex1 = sympify('x1*x2*x1**-1')
I get 'x2' because sympy automatically assumes that the symbols are
commutative.
Akin
On Feb 15, 4:37 am, Chris Smith
Hi, it's great to hear you're interested in a quantum project. I will note
that implementing a position/momentum basis was the subject of a project
last year, and I'm not sure what there might be left to implement with
that, it should be updated in the wiki to reflect this. With this and the
other
Hello,
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 4:49 AM, someone someb...@bluewin.ch wrote:
Maybe chapter 2 of Algebraic Extensions for Symbolic Summation,
the thesis of Burçin Eröcal (1st google link). It should provide
a first entry to the subject. (Most other information I have are
research papers which
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Aaron Meurer asmeu...@gmail.com wrote:
The basic idea behind Sage is that they have taken a bunch of computer
algebra systems and pulled them together into a unified interface.
SymPy is among these systems. I actually do not know to what degree
SymPy is used
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Aaron Meurer asmeu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Sergiu Ivanov
unlimitedscol...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Karr algorithm
2. Improvement of Groebner bases
3. Improvements to the poly module
What do you mean by relevance? Those are all
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Akin akinphy...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you. Is there a way to create a non-commutative expression
*directly* from a string? To be specific, if I write something like
ex1 = sympify('x1*x2*x1**-1')
Other than preprocessing the string and replacing symbols foo
Am 15.02.2012 02:14, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
The question is what would be a good interface for this?
Probably some tree transformation framework.
That way, the transformation steps exist as objects and can be
displayed, inspected, possibly varied etc.
And yes that would be sweet. In
Am 15.02.2012 17:37, schrieb Sergiu Ivanov:
This is how I envision the structure of a module that would approach
the problems I described. It should include a Python class to
represent an abstract category (call it Category), another one for an
object (CategoryObject) of the category and
Such kind of project can be helpful in making students understand
programming skills and giving them knowledge for basic mathematical problems
It can be also helpful for the Professors for teaching.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Joachim Durchholz j...@durchholz.orgwrote:
Am 15.02.2012
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Joachim Durchholz j...@durchholz.org wrote:
Am 15.02.2012 02:14, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
The question is what would be a good interface for this?
Probably some tree transformation framework.
That way, the transformation steps exist as objects and can be
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 8:46 PM, Joachim Durchholz j...@durchholz.org wrote:
Am 15.02.2012 17:37, schrieb Sergiu Ivanov:
This is how I envision the structure of a module that would approach
the problems I described. It should include a Python class to
represent an abstract category (call it
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 9:37 AM, Sergiu Ivanov
unlimitedscol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Aaron Meurer asmeu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Sergiu Ivanov
unlimitedscol...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Karr algorithm
2. Improvement of Groebner bases
3.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Aaron Meurer asmeu...@gmail.com wrote:
The best chances to be accepted are to sell yourself, not so much your
project.
Hm, sounds reasonable, although different from the perspective I was
used to adopt.
In this case, I'll have to confess that I've been
Am 15.02.2012 21:34, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
Is category theory used outside category theory?
It is, in some functional programming languages.
In Haskell, there's an ADT that is called monad, and it is supposed to
be derived from the monads in category theory. Some people are working
on
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 11:38 PM, Joachim Durchholz j...@durchholz.org wrote:
Am 15.02.2012 21:34, schrieb Aaron Meurer:
Is category theory used outside category theory?
It is, in some functional programming languages.
In Haskell, there's an ADT that is called monad, and it is supposed to
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Kevin Hunter hunt...@gmail.com wrote:
:-( Bummer. In this context, I regularly work with expressions with
thousands (sometimes tens of thousands) of variables. They aren't highly
nested, with most terms having less than 5 levels, but there are lots of
Am 15.02.2012 22:52, schrieb Sergiu Ivanov:
Monads are among fundamental things in Haskell; for example, they
allow describing imperative programming in a purely functional way.
That's more of a historic accident. Monadic I/O is just the label that
happened to be slapped onto one of three
Hmm, have there been API changes recently? With your branch, I'm not able
to check an Equality expression for the attribute is_Relational:
* from sympy import **
* from sympy.abc import x, y*
* Eq(x, y).is_Relational*
*Traceback (most recent call last):*
* File stdin, line 1, in module*
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:18 AM, Joachim Durchholz j...@durchholz.org wrote:
Am 15.02.2012 22:52, schrieb Sergiu Ivanov:
Monads are among fundamental things in Haskell; for example, they
allow describing imperative programming in a purely functional way.
That's more of a historic accident.
Le mercredi 15 février 2012 à 14:25 -0800, Kevin Hunter a écrit :
Hmm, have there been API changes recently? With your branch, I'm not
able to check an Equality expression for the attribute is_Relational:
from sympy import *
from sympy.abc import x, y
Eq(x, y).is_Relational
Traceback
Even so, it works for me, both in master and in Chris's branch. So
either it was a problem and he fixed it, or you're doing something
wrong. Make sure you checkout is clean (git status), refetch his
branch, and try again.
Aaron Meurer
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Ronan Lamy
Bah, thank you. I had checked out Chris' repository, but had forgotten to
change branches.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sympy/-/C-_1H8aPEDUJ.
To post to this
Am 15.02.2012 23:45, schrieb Sergiu Ivanov:
Didn't know about the
three competing I/O library frameworks.
Details in
http://research.microsoft.com/~simonpj/papers/history-of-haskell/history.pdf
p.22 ff.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy
Can you expand on why? To me the former reads better, and elides the need
to specifically import the Relational class:
* x.is_Relational*
*True*
vs
* from sympy.core.relational import Relational*
* isinstance(x, Relational)' reads better to me than 'isinstance(x,
Relational)*
Further, the
Excellent! For my simple test case, this now no longer goes over the 1000
recursion limit.
As an FYI, with your change, my models using Sympy now only use 45 levels
of recursion. (As tested by the if it broke test binary test.)
I really appreciate your work on this. Cheers!
--
You
Le mercredi 15 février 2012 à 15:55 -0800, Kevin Hunter a écrit :
Can you expand on why? To me the former reads better, and elides the
need to specifically import the Relational class:
There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
.is_Relational is an ad-hoc
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Sergiu Ivanov
unlimitedscol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Aaron Meurer asmeu...@gmail.com wrote:
The best chances to be accepted are to sell yourself, not so much your
project.
Hm, sounds reasonable, although different from the
By the way, I don't know if you realize it, but you can submit more
than one application (I think the limit is 20). So if you are unsure
about category theory (though by the time the application period comes
around, you shouldn't be), you can submit an application for that and
also one for
40 matches
Mail list logo
