Comment #7 on issue 2845 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Integrating the new
plotting module
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2845
The stuff on the wiki won't block on the release, though, as that's
independent of it.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Comment #4 on issue 3052 by asmeu...@gmail.com: evaluating Abs should
result in a positive number
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3052
Thanks to the magic of git, I found it in your equals branch.
That routine is about determining if a function is zero (this can be broken
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #4 on issue 3045 by smi...@gmail.com: float-based operations lose
precision
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3045
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Status: Accepted
Owner:
CC: smi...@gmail.com
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3064 by ness...@gmail.com: Factor_terms inconsistency
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3064
In [1]: a, b, s = symbols('a b s')
In [2]: 1/gamma(a/2+b/2-s+1)
Out[2]:
1
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3065 by smi...@gmail.com: int(1+2*I) gives infinite recursion
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3065
A test must be made in round to catch the case where a number (complex) is
requested to be rounded. Not
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview smichr
Comment #1 on issue 3065 by smi...@gmail.com: int(1+2*I) gives infinite
recursion
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3065
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1048
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Comment #12 on issue 2964 by smi...@gmail.com: S.One.is_prime gives True
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2964
I'm not sure if this should be opened as a new issue here or not, but there
is a very serious logical error in the new assumptions system when it comes
to this: in a
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3066 by smi...@gmail.com: int(expression) should not raise an
error
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3066
e=Add(1,Float('.99',''),evaluate=0)
int(e)
Traceback (most recent call
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3067 by smi...@gmail.com: assumptions ntheory handler
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3067
Something special is going to have to be done to get the new assumptions
system to answer queries about
Comment #1 on issue 3064 by smi...@gmail.com: Factor_terms inconsistency
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3064
Although factor_terms will not introduce coefficients on terms that have no
denominator, gcd_terms does. And once it does it's hard to recover from the
damage as a
Comment #2 on issue 3064 by ness...@gmail.com: Factor_terms inconsistency
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3064
Thank you!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to this group, send email to
Comment #3 on issue 3064 by smi...@gmail.com: Factor_terms inconsistency
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3064
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1049
I'm running test. I reset the option to clear=True so (x/2 + 1) - (x +
2)/2 by default. One may call factor_terms(e, clear=0)
Comment #4 on issue 3064 by ness...@gmail.com: Factor_terms inconsistency
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3064
My preference is not to pull it out (mainly because then I would have to
type all test results with evaluate=False everywhere), but as long as there
is an option I
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3068 by smi...@gmail.com: incorrect sign calculated
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3068
n = pi**1000
i = int(n)
sign(n - i)
1
(n-x).n(1, subs={x:i}) 0
True
(The latter is correct.)
--
You
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #2 on issue 3065 by smi...@gmail.com: int(1+2*I) gives infinite
recursion
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3065
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3069 by trel...@psu.edu: dsolve gets too many constants for a
first order linear ode
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3069
ode2 = (2*t+3)*Derivative(y(t),t) + (4*t**2 + 12*t+7)*y(t)
sol = dsolve(ode2,y(t))
Comment #1 on issue 3069 by trel...@psu.edu: dsolve gets too many constants
for a first order linear ode
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3069
Digging in, this is a problem with 'separable'. Using the
hint '1st_linear',
this works out fine. Seems first-order linear
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #5 on issue 3064 by smi...@gmail.com: Factor_terms inconsistency
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3064
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #1 on issue 3066 by smi...@gmail.com: int(expression) should not
raise an error
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3066
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3070 by smi...@gmail.com: cse raises error with RootOf
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3070
cse(RootOf(x**6-4*x**5-2,1))
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
File
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3071 by smi...@gmail.com: new assumptions system problem with
is_prime and is_even
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3071
There is a very serious logical error in the new assumptions system when it
21 matches
Mail list logo
