Comment #8 on issue 2312 by vlada.pe...@gmail.com: Remove
duplicated block_diag
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2312
Should this be removed by now? It was added in before the 0.7.0 release. I
wish this information was written somewhere clearly, rather than hunting it
with
Updates:
Owner: vlada.pe...@gmail.com
Labels: NeedsReview
Comment #1 on issue 2615 by vlada.pe...@gmail.com: Update generated
PKG-INFO file in setup.py
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2615
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/691
I think that pull request
Comment #31 on issue 565 by vlada.pe...@gmail.com: integrate does not ommit
null terms and simplify fails to handle them afterwards.
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=565
So is this fixed or what? Looks good to me.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Updates:
Summary: Allow manipulation of raw expression trees
Labels: -Priority-Medium Priority-High
Blockedon: 2738
Comment #9 on issue 747 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Allow manipulation of raw
expression trees
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=747
Kirill's
Issue 2738: Make a distinction between operations and their result
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2738
This issue is now blocking issue 747.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=747
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of
Updates:
Labels: Integration
Comment #1 on issue 1060 by ronan.l...@gmail.com:
integrate(sqrt(25-x)*sqrt(1+1/(4*(25-x))),x) can't do it
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1060
Still not working, and it's slooow to return the unevaluated expression.
--
You received this
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #1 on issue 1542 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Pretty printing for
boolean operations
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1542
This has been fixed.
In [2]: x y
Out[2]: x ∧ y
In [3]: x | y
Out[3]: x ∨ y
--
You received this message because
Comment #5 on issue 2816 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Regarding integration of
k*(x**0)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2816
Ah, this is because x**0 is actually being reduced to 1:
In [34]: 2*x**0
Out[34]: 2
so in this case, it doesn't know that the variable you want is x,
Comment #9 on issue 2312 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Remove
duplicated block_diag
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2312
We could easily make this information a part of the custom deprecation
warning from issue 2513.
And I guess the milestone-release0.7.2 tag means that we
Comment #21 on issue 2807 by moorepa...@gmail.com: Change .unit and .mag to
proper methods and better names.
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2807
Thumbs up to that. I favor normalize and magnitude.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Comment #2 on issue 1060 by asmeu...@gmail.com:
integrate(sqrt(25-x)*sqrt(1+1/(4*(25-x))),x) can't do it
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1060
If we were to allow integrate to ignore power combination rules, this would
work:
In [63]: b =
Comment #22 on issue 2807 by hazelnu...@gmail.com: Change .unit and .mag to
proper methods and better names.
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2807
Ok. I will prepare a branch that changes the .unit and .mag properties
to .normalize(self) and .magnitude(self) instance
Comment #23 on issue 2807 by hazelnu...@gmail.com: Change .unit and .mag to
proper methods and better names.
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2807
The pull request is here:
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/693
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium CodeInCategory-Code
CodeInDifficulty-Easy
New issue 2817 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Make sure all the built-in
__methods__ are defined
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2817
At
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium Polynomial
New issue 2818 by asmeu...@gmail.com: factor() returns nan
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2818
If you take the expression from http://pastebin.com/AYbUu66t, you get
In [107]: factor(p.rewrite(exp))
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview
Comment #24 on issue 2807 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Change .unit and .mag to
proper methods and better names.
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2807
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are
Updates:
Cc: moorepa...@gmail.com
Comment #4 on issue 2782 by hazelnu...@gmail.com: ReferenceFrame indices
does not properly set the indices
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2782
This was a simple fix. I've fixed it here:
Comment #3 on issue 2781 by hazelnu...@gmail.com: orientnew in
sympy.physics.mechanics does not support indices
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2781
One way to fix this would be to add kwargs to orientnew and passing them to
the constructor of the new reference frame, line
Updates:
Status: WontFix
Comment #1 on issue 1613 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: coverage stmt green even
if not fully covered
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1613
This should be reported upstream, though AFAIK it's a known issue with no
good solution, cf.
Updates:
Status: Invalid
Comment #5 on issue 1912 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: inconsistency between
facts
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1912
The meaning of complex isn't going to change any time soon: it would
break too many things.
--
You received this message
Updates:
Blockedon: 1688
Comment #2 on issue 1934 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Function.is_number oddness
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1934
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Issue 1688: Functions should be objects
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1688
This issue is now blocking issue 1934.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1934
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because
Comment #4 on issue 2254 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Support for bitwise
operations
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2254
Issue 1815 has been merged into this issue.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to this
Updates:
Status: Duplicate
Mergedinto: 2254
Comment #1 on issue 1815 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: shift operator
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1815
This has been partially fixed:
In [1]: S(4) S(3)
Updates:
Status: WontFix
Comment #3 on issue 1840 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: atoms is non-greedy
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1840
I think the current behaviour is fine. It doesn't seem to have caused any
trouble since this issue was opened and it also seems that
25 matches
Mail list logo
