Comment #64 on issue 1047 by mrock...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
The context manager was merged so part of this issue is closed. I'd like
to close this issue and reopen several more atomic ones.
--
You received this
Comment #65 on issue 1047 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Sure, let's close this and use issue 3631. I'll add a note there about
this.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Updates:
Status: Duplicate
Mergedinto: 3631
Comment #66 on issue 1047 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
Comment #63 on issue 1047 by mrock...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Here is a draft for a context manager
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1751
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Comment #61 on issue 1047 by mrock...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
I just read through this thread after learning more about context
managers/with. I now think that with some nonlocal assumption knowledgebase
is probably
Comment #60 on issue 1047 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Yes, that's the difficulty. I had actually thought about something similar
before, but I didn't pursue the idea because of the amount of magic that
Updates:
Cc: ronan.l...@gmail.com
Comment #59 on issue 1047 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
It would require some metaclass magic, though, since we'd want an instance
of ContextualizeBasic to be a subclass
Updates:
Cc: -ondrej.c...@gmail.com
Comment #58 on issue 1047 by mrock...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
What about creating a standard object that contains a Basic and a set of
applied predicates? I like the idea of
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is now blocking issue sympy:353.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=353
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Updates:
Labels: -Milestone-Release0.7.2 Milestone-Release0.8.0
Comment #56 on issue 1047 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Being a little more realistic...
--
You received this message because you are
Updates:
Owner: ---
Comment #55 on issue 1047 by matt...@gmail.com: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Comment #53 on issue 1047 by asmeurer: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
For what I said in comment 51, see issue 1887.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To post to this group,
Updates:
Labels: -Milestone-Release0.7.0 Milestone-Release0.7.1
Comment #52 on issue 1047 by asmeurer: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Unfortunately, the new assumptions won't be able to make into 0.7.0, other
than what is already
Comment #50 on issue 1047 by asmeurer: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
I think you need to rebase over the latest master. For example, one of the
failures:
…
File /Users/aaronmeurer/Documents/Python/sympy/sympy/sympy/logic/boolalg.py,
Comment #51 on issue 1047 by asmeurer: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Also, the booleans have been replaced with LatticeOp, which uses frozenset
instead of sorted, so I am sure that
this issue will go away when the branch is rebased.
This
Comment #49 on issue 1047 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
I think relational assumptions are not yet implemented.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is no longer blocking issue 1723.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1723
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is no longer blocking issue 1723.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1723
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is no longer blocking issue 353.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=353
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Updates:
Labels: -Milestone-Release0.6.7 Milestone-Release0.7.0
Comment #43 on issue 1047 by fab...@fseoane.net: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are
Comment #41 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
. +1 to what Fredrik said.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
You may
Comment #31 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Great job. I am still getting test failures, so those should be fixed.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue,
Updates:
Cc: ondrej.certik
Comment #29 on issue 1047 by fab...@fseoane.net: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
ok, i think it now can do all the things the old assumption could do (and
some more).
So go ahead, check it out, play
Comment #32 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
The attached patch fixes tests.
Attachments:
0001-Fixes-tests-to-run.patch 1.3 KB
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC
Comment #33 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
The attached patch fixes all doctests.
Fabian, could you please check this patch? I think some of the doctests are
now wrong.
Attachments:
Comment #34 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
So what remains now is to implement Basic.refine(), e.g. so that we can fix
the
following tests:
x = Symbol(x, real=True)
assert sqrt(x**2) == abs(x)
Comment #35 on issue 1047 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
I think x = Symbol(x, real=True) should be still possible. When dealing
with real
variables only, it would be quite cumbersome to use Assume(x, 'real') for
Comment #36 on issue 1047 by fab...@fseoane.net: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Thanks for those patches, Ondrej, They are both in, but you are right, some
doctests
are wrong (notably query(2, 'integer') should work_, I'll take a look at
Comment #37 on issue 1047 by fab...@fseoane.net: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Vinzent, the problem is that assumptions are no longer going to be attached
to
Symbols. We agreed on using python's with keyword to simulate global
Updates:
Owner: fab...@fseoane.net
Blockedon: -1309
Comment #25 on issue 1047 by fab...@fseoane.net: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Implemented a very naive backward chaining algorithm, so strictly speaking,
this is
no
Comment #22 on issue 1047 by fabian.seoane: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
no, I really need backward chaining before this can be merged.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Comment #23 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Ok --- but if there is anything that I can help with, let me know.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Updates:
Blockedon: 1309
Comment #24 on issue 1047 by fabian.seoane: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Thanks. I submitted issue 1309 for backward chaining algorithm. It would be
great if
you could help me with this one
--
You
Comment #18 on issue 1047 by fabian.seoane: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
You can see my progress here:
http://fseoane.net/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=sympy.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/assumptions
Currently I'm working on logic stuff. For the new
Comment #19 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
I played with it and it seems to be working!
I'll release 0.6.4 without it, but maybe let's merge what is in there now,
e.g.
remove the old assumptions and just
Comment #20 on issue 1047 by fabian.seoane: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
It really isn't ready to be included with sympy, it only supports very
basic queries,
so please release 0.6.4 without this and we'll merge aferward.
Problem is
Comment #21 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Yes -- but what stops us from getting rid of the old assumptions and
merging the new
ones in (after the release)?
The improvement can be done when this is in, no?
Comment #17 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
Great!
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
You may adjust your issue
Updates:
Labels: -Milestone-Release0.6.4 Milestone-Release0.6.5
Comment #15 on issue 1047 by ondrej.certik: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
(No comment was entered for this change.)
--
You received this message because you are listed
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is now blocking issue 398.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=398
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is now blocking issue 1051.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1051
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or
Updates:
Labels: -Priority-Medium Priority-High
Comment #12 on issue 1047 by Vinzent.Steinberg: Suggested new assumption
system
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1047
I think this is currently the most important thing to implement.
--
You received this message because
Issue 1047: Suggested new assumption system
http://code.google.com/issues/detail?id=1047
This issue is now blocking issue 353.
See http://code.google.com/issues/detail?id=353
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred
43 matches
Mail list logo
