Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #3 on issue 3692 by smi...@gmail.com:
(Symbol(n,integer=True,even=True)/2).is_integer = False !
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3692
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because this project is
Comment #3 on issue 3379 by skirpic...@gmail.com: Remove deprecated
set_main() and make_symbols() functions from geometric algebra
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3379
Is this in TODO for next release or should be postponed?
--
You received this message because this project
Comment #3 on issue 3581 by khageshp...@gmail.com: Implement
arg.rewrite(atan2)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3581
Hi,can I work on this one because akshit has already expressed his desire
to solve this bug?
--
You received this message because this project is
Comment #4 on issue 3581 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Implement arg.rewrite(atan2)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3581
I haven't seen any work on it. I think you're good to go.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this
Updates:
Cc: abro...@verizon.net
Comment #4 on issue 3379 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Remove deprecated
set_main() and make_symbols() functions from geometric algebra
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3379
From my understanding, geometric algebra is undergoing a rewrite, so
Comment #6 on issue 3691 by khageshp...@gmail.com: Add determinant to
matrix expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
Sir, I want to do this one but I am not much familiar with sympy coding
style so I want to know which algorithm should I use to calculate symbolic
Comment #7 on issue 3691 by mrock...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix
expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
SymPy has two kinds of matrix objects. Explicit ones
x = Matrix(2, 2, [1, 2, 3, 4])
2*x
[2, 4]
[6, 8]
and purely symbolic ones
x =
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3708 by demi...@gmail.com: atoms does not work correctly in the
otherwise case of Piecewise
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3708
Currently, the recomended use of Piecewise is
from sympy.abc import x, f, g
Comment #1 on issue 3708 by demi...@gmail.com: atoms does not work
correctly in the otherwise case of Piecewise
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3708
Sorry, I forgot to say that
p.atoms(Symbol)
should be
[x, f, g]
unless I misunderstood the method specification
--
You
Comment #3 on issue 3703 by skirpic...@gmail.com: Sum of a finite power
series performs automatic reduction which is not always valid
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3703
I'm not sure. I can't reproduce something either before pull 1904 or after.
Sympy returns a valid
Comment #4 on issue 3703 by tripleel...@gmail.com: Sum of a finite power
series performs automatic reduction which is not always valid
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3703
I'm sorry, I pasted the wrong summation up there. It was late and I think
my brain blew a fuse due to
Updates:
Status: Valid
Comment #2 on issue 3708 by julien.r...@gmail.com: atoms does not work
correctly in the otherwise case of Piecewise
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3708
It happens in the constructor for ExprCondPair:
Updates:
Status: Valid
Comment #5 on issue 3703 by julien.r...@gmail.com: Sum of a finite power
series performs automatic reduction which is not always valid
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3703
In your example, the summation code blindly assumes x != 1. We have
Updates:
Labels: EasyToFix
Comment #6 on issue 3703 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Sum of a finite power
series performs automatic reduction which is not always valid
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3703
OK, so pull request 1904 has partially fixed this, in that the infinite
Comment #8 on issue 3691 by khageshp...@gmail.com: Add determinant to
matrix expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
Thanks, for your support because of it I have done it what you have told me
to do.
from sympy import MatrixSymbol, Trace, eye
A =
Comment #9 on issue 3691 by mrock...@gmail.com: Add determinant to matrix
expressions
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3691
Send us a pull request so that we can see your code.
Methods to implement determinant for explicitly defined matrices (like x =
Matrix(...) above)
Issue 2531: Sympy objects for Boolean values: True, False
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2531
This issue is now blocking issue sympy:3708.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3708
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of
Updates:
Blockedon: sympy:2531
Comment #3 on issue 3708 by asmeu...@gmail.com: atoms does not work
correctly in the otherwise case of Piecewise
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3708
Issue 2531 would be the correct fix for this.
--
You received this message because
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #14 on issue 3068 by smi...@gmail.com: incorrect sign calculated
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3068
ok, if an arg can't be computed with precision teh function doesn't
evaluate now.
--
You received this message because this project is
Comment #15 on issue 3068 by smi...@gmail.com: incorrect sign calculated
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3068
fixed in https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1887 where there was also some
good discussion about nuances of Float and mpf values.
--
You received this message
Comment #5 on issue 3581 by khageshp...@gmail.com: Implement
arg.rewrite(atan2)
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3581
Can somebody tell where to look for eval_rewrite in sympy source code
directory?
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #6 on issue 3694 by smi...@gmail.com: Better Simplification of
Gammas
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3694
Although I named my commit with 3693 it should have been 3694 -- gammas now
simplify better.
--
You received this message
Comment #1 on issue 3641 by smi...@gmail.com: deep processing should be
generalized
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3641
This is what the bottom_up variants do, too, with a couple of other options
in the bottom_up in simplify (as opposed to the one in traverse). But the
Status: Valid
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3709 by smi...@gmail.com: better expand heiristics
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3709
(sin(x)*sin(y + z)).expand(trig=True)
(sin(y)*cos(z) + sin(z)*cos(y))*sin(x)
Because mul(z) comes before trig, this
Status: Valid
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3710 by smi...@gmail.com: shallow expansion feature/bug
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3710
(1 + x*(x + y)).expand(deep=False)
x*(x + y) + 1
I thought that not-deep meant do something on all args of Add
Comment #1 on issue 3710 by asmeu...@gmail.com: shallow expansion
feature/bug
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3710
The old behavior was accidental. The new behavior is simple: deep=False
only expands the top-level expression. Recall the discussion at
Comment #1 on issue 3338 by asmeu...@gmail.com: API for expand methods to
go all the way
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3338
Issue 3709 has been merged into this issue.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this
27 matches
Mail list logo
