Comment #4 on issue 2133 by mattpap: Merge new polynomials manipulation
module
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2133
The ratint() example works when you apply doit() to the result:
In [2]: from sympy.integrals.rationaltools import *
In [3]: ratint(1/(x**2 + 1), x,
Comment #5 on issue 2133 by mattpap: Merge new polynomials manipulation
module
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2133
I don't know how to run cythonized tests.
Issue `make` in the main directory of sympy and it will compile selected
modules in-place. Then run tests as
Comment #24 on issue 2132 by mattpap: Derivative of RootSum
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2132
So, SymPy doesn't know that RootSum is commutative.
Now it knows. Also RootOf is now commutative.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Comment #6 on issue 2133 by mattpap: Merge new polynomials manipulation
module
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2133
I fixed test runner to work with Python 2.4, so now all tests in
sympy.polys can be run in 2.4 and all pass.
--
You received this message because you are
Comment #27 on issue 51 by mattpap: RootOf for polynomial equations
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=51
Regarding #25, I slightly improved RooOf's API, so now we have:
1. Just a single root:
In [1]: RootOf(x**3 + x + 1, 0)
Out[1]:
⎛ 3 ⎞
RootOf⎝x + x + 1, 0⎠
2.
Updates:
Status: Started
Labels: NeedsReview
Comment #4 on issue 1386 by mattpap: data/IPython/ipythonrc-sympy doesn't
seem to work:
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1386
A fix for this issue is available from
Comment #5 on issue 1989 by mattpap: Remove depricated Matrix functions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1989
It was deprecated long enough, +1 for merging this patch before 0.7.0
release.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview
Comment #8 on issue 527 by mattpap: guessing what functions, like
integrate, roots, factor, apart (and many more), should do with the given
expression
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=527
In commits
Updates:
Status: Started
Owner: mattpap
Comment #3 on issue 1890 by mattpap: Quartic equation solution probably not
correct
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1890
After recent improvements to root_quadratic(), the result from roots() is
now much smaller, i.e.
Comment #44 on issue 2084 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: limit(1+1/x, x, 0,
dir='-') fails
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2084
I'd push this in if I understood which of the 3 pull requests named 2084
is/are the right one(s). Chris, can you sort out the confusion between
Comment #45 on issue 2084 by nicolas.pourcelot: limit(1+1/x, x, 0, dir='-')
fails
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2084
Commit bae66169 is the correct one, so pull requests 22 and 29 are both
right.
Pull request 43 should be removed however (corresponding commits b7264f6
Comment #21 on issue 1545 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Efficient data
representation in logic.satisfiable()
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1545
to_int_repr still needs to be fixed. Its performance remains horrible
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Comment #32 on issue 1923 by candleband: count_ops doesn't return a count
(by default)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1923
Nocolas, can you figure out how to modify 1923 so that And(x, y) gives back
a count of 1 (like it did in master) instead of 2. In master (AFAICT) it
Comment #46 on issue 2084 by candleband: limit(1+1/x, x, 0, dir='-') fails
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2084
I closed all 3, and opened a new request (61) that shows the correct single
commit over the current master.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
Comment #5 on issue 2018 by candleband: terms vs factors
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2018
I would like to get this terms/factors issue settled so we can break
backward compatibility at 0.7? I like the suggestion in Comment 4.
Perhaps the old methods would then get a
Updates:
Labels: -Priority-Low Priority-Critical
Comment #6 on issue 2018 by smichr: terms vs factors
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2018
I would like to get this terms/factors issue settled so we can break
backward compatibility at 0.7. I like the suggestion in
Updates:
Labels: Milestone-Release0.7.0
Comment #7 on issue 2018 by smichr: terms vs factors
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2018
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
Status: Accepted
Owner: smichr
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 2136 by smichr: polygamma expansion problems
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2136
polygamma needs some attention since the expanded and unexpanded forms give
different results when substituting in a
Comment #33 on issue 1923 by nicolas.pourcelot: count_ops doesn't return a
count (by default)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1923
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Add(x, y).count_ops() still
returns 1:
$ git checkout smichr/1923
$ ./bin/isympy
In [1]:
Comment #20 on issue 2041 by smichr: Doctest failures in Python 2.6.6
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2041
FWIW, all but 1 doctest pass under windows. The one that doesn't pass is
the evalf.txt line:
N(fibonacci(1000) - (GoldenRatio)**1000/sqrt(5), strict=True)
which
Comment #10 on issue 2110 by smichr: failing tests
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2110
Under windows this DOES NOT fail in 2.6 but DOES fail in 2.7.
int(floor((GoldenRatio**999 / sqrt(5) + Rational(1,2))).evalf(1000)) -
maximum recursion error in 2.7 is generated.
--
You
Comment #11 on issue 2110 by smichr: failing tests
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2110
(The tsolve tests also fails under 2.7.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to this group, send email to
Updates:
Cc: Ronan.Lamy
Comment #34 on issue 1923 by smichr: count_ops doesn't return a count (by
default)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1923
I am really having a bad day with sessions...yes, I (now) get the same
result.
Should count_ops() have these lines:
Comment #20 on issue 1337 by smichr: find all instances in an expression
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1337
While normal atoms can do some of what find does,
f.atoms(tan)
set([tan(1), tan(x**2), tan(tan(1 - x)), tan(1 - x)])
It can't find more general patterns so this
Comment #5 on issue 2126 by smichr: fix doctest or quality testing to
recognize doctests
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2126
Issue 2035 has been merged into this issue.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post
Updates:
Status: Duplicate
Mergedinto: 2126
Comment #4 on issue 2035 by smichr: doctest puzzle
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2035
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Updates:
Status: Invalid
Comment #3 on issue 2036 by smichr: How to get GCD and LCM out of three and
more Values?
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2036
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Comment #34 on issue 1757 by smichr: coding style
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1757
Here are some other issues that have come up and can be discussed:
1) always name the first argument of a method self
2) don't modify self in a method.
--
You received this message because
Comment #35 on issue 1757 by mattpap: coding style
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1757
I disagree with 1) because in many cases it's more natural to not use self.
Even in Python's standard library self is not always used as the first
argument, e.g. in Fraction class from
Comment #30 on issue 16 by dketch: objects with indices (tensors)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=16
+1 for getting this functionality into sympy...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to this group, send
Comment #14 on issue 1949 by asmeurer: Doctests for polynomials module
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1949
Concerning comments 7, 9, and 10, I tried building the docs in polys12
using Sphinx 1.0.5, and perhaps it is a new feature, but I the docs still
built despite all the
Comment #15 on issue 1949 by mattpap: Doctests for polynomials module
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1949
I didn't work on documentation yet, so let me look into this tomorrow.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
Issue 2135: Drop support for Python 2.4
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2135
This issue is now blocking issue 1998.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1998
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because
Comment #21 on issue 2041 by asmeurer: Doctest failures in Python 2.6.6
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2041
I am currently in the process of updating mpmth, so see if that still fails
after that.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Comment #2 on issue 2135 by mattpap: Drop support for Python 2.4
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2135
This way we will be also able to use things like collections.Callable
instead of callable() to move towards Python 3.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
Updates:
Status: Duplicate
Mergedinto: 1985
Comment #6 on issue 2067 by asmeurer: (x+I*x)/(1+I).as_real_imag() doesn't
give re(x), im(x)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2067
This was fixed in issue 1985 (it's the exact same expression!).
--
You received this
Comment #21 on issue 1985 by asmeurer: as_real_imag() gives wrong answer
when expanding quotient
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1985
Issue 2067 has been merged into this issue.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
Comment #35 on issue 1923 by nicolas.pourcelot: count_ops doesn't return a
count (by default)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1923
Well, I personally don't mind.
Concerning style, however, I would write it as following :
elif isinstance(expr, Expr):
return
Comment #36 on issue 1757 by asmeurer: coding style
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1757
What do you mean don't modify self in a method?
And by the way, the first argument of class methods should be cls,
not self.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
Comment #3 on issue 2135 by asmeurer: Drop support for Python 2.4
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2135
I actually made a list of things we can do once we drop Python 2.4 in that
second mailing list link above. This wasn't one of the items, though.
Personally, I can't wait
Comment #4 on issue 2135 by mattpap: Drop support for Python 2.4
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2135
Imagine wrapping the options manager around a with statement.
See sympy/polys/polycontext.py ;) (__enter__ and __exit__ currently raise
NotImplemented error, but it's not a
Updates:
Status: Started
Comment #31 on issue 16 by Vinzent.Steinberg: objects with indices (tensors)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=16
The Indexed class and friends implement some tensor stuff:
http://docs.sympy.org/dev/modules/tensor.html
--
You received this
Updates:
Cc: fredrik.johansson
Comment #12 on issue 2110 by Vinzent.Steinberg: failing tests
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2110
CC'ing Fredrik, as this is his code.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To
Comment #22 on issue 2041 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Doctest failures in Python
2.6.6
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2041
The failing doctest is apparently correlated to the failing test in issue
2110.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Comment #37 on issue 1757 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: coding style
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1757
What do you mean don't modify self in a method?
More precisely, it's don't rebind the first argument of a method
(usually 'self' or 'cls') inside the method.
It means that
Comment #13 on issue 2110 by asmeurer: failing tests
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2110
My mpmath 0.16 branch is at
https://github.com/asmeurer/sympy/tree/mpmath-0.16, so you can see if the
evalf bug still fails there.
--
You received this message because you are
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview asmeurer
Comment #23 on issue 2041 by asmeurer: Doctest failures in Python 2.6.6
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2041
This was not too hard to fix. I basically had to do what I said in comment
11: I took the code that was changed in that
Comment #14 on issue 2110 by asmeurer: failing tests
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2110
Also try it in my fixed doctest runner
(https://github.com/asmeurer/sympy/tree/doctest).
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues
Comment #15 on issue 2110 by asmeurer: failing tests
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2110
Re comment 7: Vinzent, do you perhaps have a lower recursion limit for some
reason? What does sys.getrecursionlimit() return for you (it should be
1000)? Does setting it higher with
Comment #38 on issue 1757 by asmeurer: coding style
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1757
I see. Yes, that is probably a bad idea, because then you lose access to
self. But does it really happen so often that we need to test for it? I
have never seen anything like that
Comment #1 on issue 2136 by asmeurer: polygamma expansion problems
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2136
Well, one doesn't have to substitute in values to see that this is messed
up:
In [1]: polygamma(0, 2*x).expand(func=True)
Out[1]: log(2) + polygamma(0, 2⋅x)
Clearly there
Status: Accepted
Owner: smichr
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 2137 by smichr: as_real_imag is broken for cos(1+I)**3
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2137
The following commit breaks the as_real_imag behavior of the expression
that follows:
Updates:
Labels: WrongResult EasyToFix NeedsReview asmeurer
Comment #1 on issue 2137 by asmeurer: as_real_imag is broken for cos(1+I)**3
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2137
I knew that people should have reviewed that part of the code better before
it was pushed in!
Comment #6 on issue 1989 by asmeurer: Remove depricated Matrix functions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1989
Go ahead and cherry-pick the commits from integration3 that you are +1 on
into release0.7.0 or polys12, and they will go in with that (if you
cherry-pick, I will
Comment #7 on issue 2133 by asmeurer: Merge new polynomials manipulation
module
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2133
Regarding the intervals thing, if I apply the patch:
diff --git a/sympy/polys/tests/test_polytools.py
b/sympy/polys/tests/test_polytools.py
index
Comment #26 on issue 2132 by asmeurer: Derivative of RootSum
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2132
I think the problem, or at least part of the problem, is that it is trying
to expand the RootSum into a sum or RootOfs instead of simplifying the
rational function Lambda, which
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview
Comment #8 on issue 2018 by smichr: terms vs factors
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2018
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/65
I just renamed as_coeff_terms to as_coeff_mul and as_coeff_factors to
as_coeff_add and in a few places changed
57 matches
Mail list logo
