Comment #9 on issue 2362 by smi...@gmail.com: subs or N has an issue with
quartic/quadratic root
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2362
But there are some assurances in using cancel, aren't there?
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
Comment #8 on issue 3038 by smi...@gmail.com: sign change in evalf of
complex value as precision is increased
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3038
Just confirming that the issues of comment 2 have been fixed already:
f = 5*sqrt(x) + 5*sqrt(-x + 1) + 5*sqrt(x + 1) -
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #4 on issue 2088 by smi...@gmail.com: (oo).evalf(chop=True) - 0
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2088
(oo).evalf(chop=True)
+inf
Since 31c0dbd05b1da88bea367af8ac9a16ab9d92ec70
--
You received this message because this project is
Comment #11 on issue 3068 by smi...@gmail.com: incorrect sign calculated
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3068
So it looks like the sign of some numbers can come back as an expression
which, when evaluated, will give the correct sign:
n=pi**1000
i=int(n)
sign(n-i)
Comment #10 on issue 3052 by smi...@gmail.com: evaluating Abs should result
in a positive number
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3052
Abs is now left in place. And since sign(nearlyzeroexpression).n()._prec
may not be 1 (i.e. since the sign of an expression which might be
Comment #5 on issue 2256 by srjoglek...@gmail.com: Logical operators should
reject non-boolean arguments
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2256
@asmeurer, I may send a PR on this soon. Just for confirmation, would we
want And/Or/Not to support any non-Boolean arguments (apart
Comment #6 on issue 2256 by srjoglek...@gmail.com: Logical operators should
reject non-boolean arguments
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2256
Though the creation of something like BooleanSymbol would be a better fix
for this, something of that type would take a while I
Comment #7 on issue 2256 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Logical operators should
reject non-boolean arguments
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2256
Sounds good. Should remove ambiguity that the Boolean operations might be
bitwise.
--
You received this message because this project
Comment #9 on issue 2256 by srjoglek...@gmail.com: Logical operators should
reject non-boolean arguments
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2256
Ok then. Will send a PR in a day.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications
Status: Valid
Owner:
Labels: Type-Enhancement Priority-Medium Matrices
New issue 3691 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
Matrix symbols have no determinant function. Someone on IRC wanted to
express Cramer's
Updates:
Labels: Assumptions
Comment #1 on issue 3691 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix
expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
You can also transfer assumptions on the matrix to assumptions on the
determinant (like nonzero, real, positive,
Comment #2 on issue 3691 by mrock...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix
expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
Symbolic determinant would be good. It should be simple to do. If anyone
is interested I recommend looking at sympy/matrices/expressions/trace.py as
Comment #10 on issue 2362 by smi...@gmail.com: subs or N has an issue with
quartic/quadratic root
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2362
The following shows the significant simplification that can occur when
using cancel and expand(complex=True) on an expression:
eq = u**4
Updates:
Labels: EasyToFix
Comment #3 on issue 3691 by mrock...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix
expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
I've marked this as EasyToFix in hopes that it attracts some GSoC student.
Please note that the Cramers rule,
Comment #4 on issue 3691 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix
expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
Also the basic determinant rules, which are listed in section 1.1 of the
matrix cookbook (issue 2759). There's also the question about which of
Updates:
Status: Valid
Comment #1 on issue 3692 by asmeu...@gmail.com:
(Symbol(n,integer=True,even=True)/2).is_integer = False !
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3692
But note that the new assumptions get it right
In [60]: ask(Q.integer(n/2), Q.even(n))
Out[60]: True
Comment #5 on issue 3691 by mrock...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix
expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
Ideally the implementation of these simplifications is a separate
consideration from when/where they're called. Simplification in matrix
expressions
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium Solvers WrongResult
New issue 3693 by skirpic...@gmail.com: solve() returns only subset of
solutions for polynomial eqs
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3693
An example:
In [1]: eq=x**14 - x**13 + 54*x**12 - 54*x**11
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #4 on issue 3595 by smi...@gmail.com: ZerodivisionError with
floating point Matrix inversion
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3595
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because this project is configured
I'll get in contact with him. I might just build a new object for them.
On Friday, March 8, 2013 4:58:17 AM UTC-5, Ben Fishbein wrote:
I want to add a few things to sympy's matrices class such as image
and kernel of a matrix. Both of these are represented as the span of a set
of vectors.
Concerning the table of content: `grep # file.md` helps.
On 10 March 2013 02:08, Aaron Meurer asmeu...@gmail.com wrote:
This looks much better. It's too bad that you can't automatically get
a table of contents.
I moved the step-by-step idea down on the page, as per the other
discussion on
Sachin,
The api you've suggested is a nice goal. We have a similar goal for the
mechanics module. i.e. we'd like to have a world/system class and add
rigid bodies to it, then define those bodies' relationships and finally
generate the equations of motion for that world/system. We started by
Well, I have to agree with you. For any branch of physics, a sandbox world
for it is a long way to go.
From what I see, even the development of a comprehensive
ElectroMagneticField would take considerable thought and planning,
especially considering the implementation of concepts like time and
There might be serious issues with this approach. Most of sympy tries
to have selfcontained objects. This is quite important because of
(among other things):
- having consistent hashes and __eq__ behavior
- actually rebuilding these objects on tree traversal
The `mechanics` module uses the
@Stefan, that could be a good way to do it, maintaining the consistency
with the rest of sympy's architecture. We could have something like
p = ChargedParticle('P', 3) (where 3 is the charge possessed by the
particle)
p.set_pos(O, R*x)
p.addtoWorld(world1)
The last line could update the
Hello,
I'm interested in a library which can solve constant acceleration motion
problems (i.e. problems you see in in college-level physics courses). I
didn't see anything in the sympy.physics module that seemed to hit upon
this directly, but maybe I missed something.
Is there a library out
This sounds like it could be a good project (or rather a decent part of a
GSoC project). Vector/ReferenceFrame were indeed written for the needs of
the mechanics module, and not for general SymPy use. This meant a slight
focus on time (as Stefan mentioned) and a big focus on multiple reference
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Eduardo Cavazos wayo.cava...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I'm interested in a library which can solve constant acceleration motion
problems (i.e. problems you see in in college-level physics courses). I
didn't see anything in the sympy.physics module that seemed to
This is a good discussion. As Jason mentioned, us mechanics people have
been discussing a bigger world environment lately. Specifically, we've
been trying to understand where analytical formulations fit in a world of
numerical simulation. Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, we haven't made
much
Python is now accepting applications for projects to work as mentoring
organizations for them. See
http://wiki.python.org/moin/SummerOfCode/2013. You can also fill out
this form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/12t6trgG_X9ZWE6Rj1VgkTTeDqtMfL9gyhsLRUvOFdI8/viewform.
If you think there's a pretty
Hi,
This is Pallav Tinna, 3rd Year Computer Science student at
International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad (IIIT-H). I am
planning to apply for GSOC-2013 in SYMPY. I have a sound knowledge and
experience in C, C++ and Python. I have already started familiarizing
myself with
If two expression trees are structurally the same they should unify under
some mapping of symbols. usympy makes this very easy to test for:
def structurally_equal(a, b):
... from sympy.unify import usympy
... if isinstance(a, (list, tuple)):
... if type(a) != type(b): return
Thanks Aaron. We've been working on this application
https://pydy.org/gsoc_2013_organization_application (which takes a lot of
inspiration from SymPy's work). We'll give it a shot and hopefully we can
round up several students to work on a couple projects in SymPy and maybe
some outside.
Jason
@gilbertgede, thanks for your input, especially the idea of writing out
basic electrodynamics problems in 'programming mode' to understand what
classes and infrastructure I would need, to build the core of
sympy.physics.electromagnetism. If possible for you, please have a look at
the concepts that
34 matches
Mail list logo
