This has been discussed before. Overriding Basic.__eq__ is
unrecommended, because a ton of code uses == with its current meaning,
and, as you've found, changing this will break things.
Here are some workarounds I can see:
- Do some kind of string parsing. In other words, it's pretty
straight fo
Okay, this is my fault, but I'm wondering if there's a way around it while
still using SymPy. Specifically, I want the ability to create an equation
with Python's == syntax. (I.e., I don't want to be forced to use the Eq()
method.)
At one point in my code, I have done this:
*from sympy impor
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:21 AM, Chris Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Kevin Hunter wrote:
>> Hullo Sympifiers,
>>
>> I've created (programmatically) a situation that boils down to something
>> like:
>>
>> x, y = symbols( 'x,y' )
>> And( x < y, y < oo )
>>
>> This currently result
Having done a little debugging, I now can't produce a simple example like I
could so easily last night. Potentially a false alarm as I now suspect I
may have polluted SymPy's namespace somehow. (The same code in two
different instances of SymPy works and doesn't work.) I'll post when I
have
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> Hullo Sympifiers,
>
> I've created (programmatically) a situation that boils down to something
> like:
>
> x, y = symbols( 'x,y' )
> And( x < y, y < oo )
>
> This currently results in a sympification error,
Can you post the traceback? I don't
Hullo Sympifiers,
I've created (programmatically) a situation that boils down to something
like:
*x, y = symbols( 'x,y' )*
*And( x < y, y < oo )*
This currently results in a sympification error, I gather on the boolean
that the *y < oo* becomes. I'm not clear on why, however. In this case,
