Status: Accepted
Owner: smichr
CC: asmeurer, Vinzent.Steinberg
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium NeedsReview
New issue 1963 by smichr: changes to core/power
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1963
This patch tries to get power's eval_power and as_numer_denom() to do more
with
Comment #1 on issue 1963 by smichr: changes to core/power
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1963
It's branch 1963 (single commit over master) at smichr's acct at github.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to
Updates:
Labels: -NeedsReview NeedsBetterPatch
Comment #2 on issue 1963 by asmeurer: changes to core/power
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1963
I'm not particularly fond of
eq=eqn(npos, dpos, pow);assert eq.is_Pow and eq.as_numer_denom() ==
(npos**pow, dpos**pow)
Updates:
Labels: -NeedsReview PassedReview
Comment #3 on issue 1961 by asmeurer: integration works too hard
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1961
I still need to look at the advantages/disadvantages of pulling out
coefficients (it will probably be a good idea, but I
Comment #4 on issue 1961 by smichr: integration works too hard
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1961
I don't use integration much. I don't mind just withdrawing this if we make
sure that expressions are correctly integrated regardless of their state of
expansion. On the other
Comment #3 on issue 1963 by smichr: changes to core/power
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1963
I will make those changes.
Regarding the behavior, it's (neg/neg)**x vs (neg/pos)**x. Unless sign
simplification is done to change the (neg/neg)**x to (pos/pos)**x one can't
break
