This is in. Thanks.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1416#issuecomment-7639961
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-patches group.
To post to this group, send email to
@@ -1336,26 +1336,37 @@ def _eval_rewrite(self, pattern, rule, **hints):
return self.func(*terms)
def rewrite(self, *args, **hints):
-Rewrites expression containing applications of functions
- of one kind in terms of functions of different kind. For
-
@@ -1336,26 +1336,37 @@ def _eval_rewrite(self, pattern, rule, **hints):
return self.func(*terms)
def rewrite(self, *args, **hints):
-Rewrites expression containing applications of functions
- of one kind in terms of functions of different kind. For
-
Thanks for the correction! It was suppose to go in. Sean, are you ok with this
change as is and leave the moving of it to another request?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1416#issuecomment-7648993
--
You received this message because
(I didn't see any issues to close.)
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1471#issuecomment-7650113
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-patches group.
To post to this group, send email to
I had a comment that was unaddressed. It looked like maybe something more was
going to be done (based on the last comment) though my suggestion and that one
could wait til later).
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
Regarding the emojis being first -- I think the header looks fine as
is (with the emoji coming afterwards). I was talking about the
individual results lines. It is there that I would omit the
Interpreter information and just put the emoji first and the other
info after it for each interpreter. You
This was the final cleanup that I wasn't able to include a few days ago.
Nothing major. See if tests concur.
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/smichr/sympy combsimp
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
Since which interpreter was used is obvious from what follows on a given line,
the Interpreter 1-like prefixes could be removed so what would appear first
are the emoji icons.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy-bot/pull/123#issuecomment-7604206
Tom, how do you feel about putting in the new multiplication_theorem
algorithm that doesn't depend on the order of terms? And how about not
doing simplification of the differences? If you don't simplify terms
then I *think* the gamma args will sort so that the rationals, for a
given residual (arg
@@ -129,6 +129,27 @@ COMMAND LINE OPTIONS
example, if you define a function in isympy with an undefined
Symbol, it will not work.
+See also the -i and -I options.
+
+-i, --int-to-Integer
+
+Automatically wrap int literals with Integer. This makes it so that
+
I verified that the test is being run and that it doesn't matter. (You can even
remove the cos() denominator altogether and it still passes.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1469#issuecomment-7571857
--
You received this message because
There's a tiny bit of cleanup in the processing of a run in the code, but
that will have to wait. My computer just died and I don't know when it will be
fixed. In any case, it's a minor change that can be added later. Since this is
passing and Tom is OK with the changes, I will commit this.
There's a tiny bit of cleanup in the processing of a run in the code, but
that will have to wait. My computer just died and I don't know when it will be
fixed. In any case, it's a minor change that can be added later. Since this is
passing and Tom is OK with the changes, I will commit this.
@angadhn , will you fix the error in the docs, too? (Just want to make sure
this doesn't get forgotten as we move towards the release of 0.7.2).
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1469#issuecomment-7574702
--
You received this message
This fixes the problem in a non-superficial way, but there is an underlying
issue of how best to order/process args to get the best simplification in
combsimp.
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/smichr/sympy combsimp
Or you can view, comment on it, or
Let's see if this fixes the docstring error.
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/smichr/sympy sphinx-error
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1463
-- Commit Summary --
* fix default_sort_key
It would be nice if someone else could look this one over. Am I using
self._print correctly?
This fixes And/Or related doctest failures in boolalg.py and rv.py
The last persistent failure is that mprint.
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/smichr/sympy
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/smichr/sympy rand
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1427
-- Commit Summary --
* Expr.expand: Always iterate the hints in the same order.
* meijerint_definite:
You can merge this Pull Request by running:
git pull https://github.com/smichr/sympy 3322
Or you can view, comment on it, or merge it online at:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1409
-- Commit Summary --
* 3322: don't break apart I in Mul._eval_subs
-- File Changes --
M
These generators accept None, int, or a sequence. The returned
generator is then called like random's version, e.g. _randint()(1,3)
and mostly the result is the same unless a sequence is sent. In that
case the elements of the sequence that satisfy the arguments given
will be returned, e.g. ri =
21 matches
Mail list logo
