Comment #3 on issue 3781 by skirpic...@gmail.com: String printer for
factorial/subfactorial shouldn't be a pretty-printer!
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3781
I don't think I have found something related... May be that:
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=141
Comment #5 on issue 3781 by asmeu...@gmail.com: String printer for
factorial/subfactorial shouldn't be a pretty-printer!
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3781
It was issue 2889.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3783 by hacm...@gmail.com: Prufer.edges test depends on order of
set
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3783
the method Prufer.edges iterates through a set
(sympy/combinatorics/prufer.py line 271), appending
Updates:
Status: Valid
Comment #1 on issue 3783 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Prufer.edges test depends
on order of set
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3783
It's curious that this doesn't fail with hash randomization. I guess none
of the elements are hashed against a
Updates:
Labels: Combinatorics Milestone-Release0.7.3
Comment #2 on issue 3783 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Prufer.edges test depends
on order of set
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3783
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because this
Comment #5 on issue 3172 by asmeu...@gmail.com: KroneckerDelta contains
secondquant-specific stuff
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3172
I think so.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You may
Updates:
Status: Valid
Labels: Series
Comment #1 on issue 3723 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Multivariate Order()
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3723
ISsue 1756 is somewhat related to this.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #6 on issue 3475 by smi...@gmail.com: simplify the square of an
addition
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3475
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #5 on issue 2699 by smi...@gmail.com: apart() should be more
careful about distributing over an Add
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2699
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because this project is
Comment #19 on issue 642 by smi...@gmail.com: make all simplify functions
nc-aware
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=642
rcollect remains to become nc-aware
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You
Updates:
Summary: use ordered_iter or iterable instead of checking for literal
container
Labels: -Solvers -NeedsReview -torstenmarcoknodt EasyToFix
Comment #16 on issue 2014 by smi...@gmail.com: use ordered_iter or iterable
instead of checking for literal container
Hi
I have uploaded my proposal at wiki as well as google melange.
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/GSOC-2013-Application-Saurabh-Jha:-Linear-Algebra-Module
https://google-melange.appspot.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2013/saurabh_jha/11001
I think the application is still pretty vague.
I've updated my proposal on melange.
http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/proposal/review/google/gsoc2013/manojkumar/1
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 8:32 PM, Manoj Kumar
manojkumarsivaraj...@gmail.comwrote:
I've made a few changes in my proposal, focussing a bit more on the
implementation part, and
consider the sympy expressions -
a = a_1*e_1+...+a_n*e_n
b = b_1*e_1+...+b_n*e_n
where the a_i's and the b_i's are commutative sympy expressions and the
e_i's are non-commutative symbols and you have a dictionary
mul_dict = {e_i*e_j: f(e_i,e_j)}
if mul_dict is fully populated then
a*b =
On 04/27/2013 12:40 PM, Alan Bromborsky wrote:
consider the sympy expressions -
a = a_1*e_1+...+a_n*e_n
b = b_1*e_1+...+b_n*e_n
where the a_i's and the b_i's are commutative sympy expressions and the
e_i's are non-commutative symbols and you have a dictionary
mul_dict = {e_i*e_j: f(e_i,e_j)}
It should work with a custom dictionary. At the very least, it will
work with any iterator or (old, new) pairs.
You could also make f symbolic and unevaluated by default, then call
doit after the substitution. It won't be 100% efficient if the same f
will appear more than once, though.
Aaron
Since you are taking about inner products, you might look at generalizing
some of the code in the quantum module so that it just uses the vector
module. Some notes:
- the quantum module uses infinite dimensional vector spaces, so it will
need to work more symbolically than just rewriting
Since you are taking about inner products, you might look at generalizing
some of the code in the quantum module so that it just uses the
vector module.
Hmm .. I think it can be done but thinking it through and going through the
code in quantum module will take some time. My final exams
On Saturday, April 27, 2013, Prasoon Shukla wrote:
Since you are taking about inner products, you might look at
generalizing some of the code in the quantum module so that it just
uses the vector module.
Hmm .. I think it can be done but thinking it through and going through
the code
I see that IPython has started doing public Google+ hangouts for some
of their core discussions. See for example
https://plus.google.com/105051551851350439748/posts/411V5Gyps1f.
I think this is really cool. The hangout is basically a really
intelligent multi-way video chat that requires no setup.
A great idea -- plus you can share your screen in a hangout (something I
take advantage of quite frequently), which would be useful for demoing
something or showing spots of the code.
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Aaron Meurer asmeu...@gmail.com wrote:
I see that IPython has started doing
Will matrices support domains by the time the summer starts? Or should I
also plan on working on that as a part of my project?
Thanks,
- Shravas Rao
On Tuesday, April 23, 2013 6:19:15 PM UTC-4, Aaron Meurer wrote:
Only cyclic finite fields are implemented. F_q for q = p^n for n 1
is not
22 matches
Mail list logo
