Re: Issue 1804 in sympy: as_independent could respect non-commutatives

Comment #1 on issue 1804 by smichr: as_independent could respect non-commutatives http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1804 On second thought, it's probably best to leave as_independent mostly naive except for commutative ordering. Commit 1804 in branch 1766 has all work on this

Re: Issue 1660 in sympy: [PATCH] derivatives of composed functions should not evaluate to a derivative in terms of a function

Updates: Labels: -NeedsBetterPatch NeedsReview Comment #4 on issue 1660 by renato.c...@gmail.com: [PATCH] derivatives of composed functions should not evaluate to a derivative in terms of a function http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1660 Sorry for the huge delay,

Re: Issue 1660 in sympy: [PATCH] derivatives of composed functions should not evaluate to a derivative in terms of a function

Updates: Status: Started Cc: Vinzent.Steinberg Comment #5 on issue 1660 by asmeurer: [PATCH] derivatives of composed functions should not evaluate to a derivative in terms of a function http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1660 Like Ondrej said, the ideal solution

Re: Issue 1598 in sympy: New polynomials manipulation module

Comment #61 on issue 1598 by mattpap: New polynomials manipulation module http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1598 Update of the new polynomials module is available at: http://github.com/mattpap/sympy-polys/commits/polys5 (rebased on top of master). Changes: - implemented real

Re: Issue 1598 in sympy: New polynomials manipulation module

Comment #62 on issue 1598 by Vinzent.Steinberg: New polynomials manipulation module http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1598 Great! Do you think we should merge before or after the next release, which is necessary to happen soon due to issue 1783? I'm getting this failure on

Re: Issue 1598 in sympy: New polynomials manipulation module

Comment #63 on issue 1598 by asmeurer: New polynomials manipulation module http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1598 If you want to do a release for issue 1783, I would suggest just having a 0.6.6.1 release (or 0.6.7), and putting the new polys and hopefully the new assumptions in

Re: Issue 1598 in sympy: New polynomials manipulation module

Comment #64 on issue 1598 by Vinzent.Steinberg: New polynomials manipulation module http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1598 I think that the new polys module might possibly be more stable than the old one, as it should fix many bugs. -- You received this message because you

Re: Issue 1598 in sympy: New polynomials manipulation module

Comment #66 on issue 1598 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: New polynomials manipulation module http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1598 The minor release (0.6.7 or whatever) shouldn't introduce incompatibilities. The new module should appear in 0.7.0 but not before. BTW, I wonder how

Re: Issue 758 in sympy: merge Basic.compare and compare_terms

Updates: Status: Fixed Comment #1 on issue 758 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: merge Basic.compare and compare_terms http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=758 There's nothing called compare_terms now. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields

Re: Issue 1598 in sympy: New polynomials manipulation module

Comment #67 on issue 1598 by Vinzent.Steinberg: New polynomials manipulation module http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1598 BTW, I wonder how to review such a big chunk of code sensibly. Release early, release often. :) The module is under review for quite some time

Re: Issue 111 in sympy: Simplification of trig expressions

Updates: Labels: -Priority-Low Priority-Medium Comment #18 on issue 111 by asmeurer: Simplification of trig expressions http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=111 I modified the patch into a branch at http://github.com/asmeurer/sympy/tree/111. I still need to clean it up

Re: Issue 1772 in sympy: Integral(1,x).is_number fails

Updates: Labels: NeedsReview Comment #2 on issue 1772 by smichr: Integral(1,x).is_number fails http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1772 Ronan writes: I'm -1 on 1772: stuff related to class Integral should go in class Integral. Sorry, still finding my way around how

Re: Issue 1766 in sympy: expand(power_base=True) is too aggressive

Comment #44 on issue 1766 by smichr: expand(power_base=True) is too aggressive http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1766 I moved the comment about 1772 to issue 1772 and made the changes which are hopefully more in the expected direction. 1794 and 1795 have been merged with