Comment #3 on issue 1580 by fab...@fseoane.net: Assume(0 x) should repr()
to Assume(0 x, 'relational', True)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1580
That's fine with me. Makes copy paste much easier. +1
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC
Comment #4 on issue 1580 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Assume(0 x) should repr()
to Assume(0 x, 'relational', True)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1580
Please note that not only printing of assumptions is affected, the printing
of
strings in args has been changed. I'm just fixing
Updates:
Labels: -NeedsReview NeedsBetterPatch
Comment #5 on issue 1580 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Assume(0 x) should repr()
to Assume(0 x, 'relational', True)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1580
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message
Status: Accepted
Owner:
CC: ondrej.certik
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 1726 by Vinzent.Steinberg: XFAIL decorator does not work with
py.test
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1726
$ py.test -k sqrt
[...]
def wrapper():
try:
func()
Updates:
Labels: -NeedsBetterPatch NeedsReview
Comment #6 on issue 1580 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Assume(0 x) should repr()
to Assume(0 x, 'relational', True)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1580
This time without failing tests...
Attachments:
Comment by Vinzent.Steinberg:
This does not work anymore.
For more information:
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/wiki/DistributedTesting
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to this group, send email to
Comment by Vinzent.Steinberg:
Use instead for example
$ py.test -n3
to run the tests using 3 processes.
For more information:
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/wiki/DistributedTesting
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview
Comment #7 on issue 1720 by Vinzent.Steinberg: integrate(asin(x/2),x)
crashes
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1720
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of
Comment #1 on issue 1725 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Implement switch manager for
expand() and possibly others
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1725
+ pi/pi
I prefer this much over expand_log() and friends.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC
Comment #4 on issue 1656 by akshaysrinivasan: lambdify does not yield
Symbolic expressions.
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1656
Sorry it took a while. I've added some tests now; all the other tests pass
now.
Attachments:
Issue 1717: inconsistency between facts
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1717
This issue is now blocking issue 1723.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1723
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you
Updates:
Status: Started
Blockedon: -1047 1717
Comment #10 on issue 1723 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: .is_real == False for a
real number
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1723
.is_real will be deprecated, so let's not try to fix it. Please feel free
to reopen
in
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is no longer blocking issue 1723.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1723
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Comment #2 on issue 1725 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Implement switch manager
for expand() and possibly others
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1725
-1 for removing expand_* functions
I see your point but .expand() adds a lot of overhead, and therefore should
be called
less
Comment #6 on issue 1717 by nicolas.pourcelot: inconsistency between facts
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1717
BTW, 'not is None' is more efficient than '!= None'.
I think you mean 'is not None'.
How is not is None faster than != None? This is interesting to me.
As far as I
Comment #7 on issue 1233 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: fix the rest of jython
bugs
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1233
Yes, anything you can report is useful (even better if you manage to fix
it, of
course!). Unfortunately, the test suite doesn't behave properly when sympy
Comment #3 on issue 1725 by asmeurer: Implement switch manager for expand()
and possibly others
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1725
There is also the expand() function (not the method). I am not seeing how
the overhead is different. expand_* are just
wrappers around the
Updates:
Labels: -NeedsBetterPatch NeedsReview
Comment #5 on issue 1656 by asmeurer: lambdify does not yield Symbolic
expressions.
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1656
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are listed in the
Comment #11 on issue 1723 by asmeurer: .is_real == False for a real number
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1723
As far as with statements and Python2.4, if I remember correctly, we
decided that we would keep Python2.4 support for
about a year last summer. So probably by the
Comment #7 on issue 1717 by Vinzent.Steinberg: inconsistency between facts
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1717
In [16]: %timeit a is None
1000 loops, best of 3: 63 ns per loop
In [17]: %timeit a == None
1000 loops, best of 3: 93.3 ns per loop
This is because is just
Updates:
Owner: Ronan.Lamy
Comment #12 on issue 1723 by Vinzent.Steinberg: .is_real == False for a
real number
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1723
If you are interested in working on it and it's easy to fix, please go for
it. I'm
just personally more interested in
Comment #5 on issue 1725 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Implement switch manager
for expand() and possibly others
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1725
Here's an excerpt of the result of python -m cProfile --sort=cumulative
bin/test
sympy/series:
19577742 function calls (17918448
Comment #8 on issue 1717 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: inconsistency between
facts
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1717
The difference does matter if there's a non-trivial .__eq__() (NB: it's not
the case
here). For instance:
In [1]: a = Symbol('a')
In [2]: %timeit a == None
1
Comment #6 on issue 1725 by asmeurer: Implement switch manager for expand()
and possibly others
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1725
If the switch manager is used as it should, it would greatly reduce
recursive calls. I am willing to bet that most of these calls
to expand
Updates:
Labels: -Priority-High Priority-Low NeedsReview
Comment #5 on issue 1515 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: caching does not distinct
ints and longs
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1515
1) What are the outstanding issues?
2) I've pushed a branch removing the type checks
25 matches
Mail list logo
