Updates:
Labels: -NeedsReview NeedsBetterPatch
Comment #13 on issue 2625 by julien.r...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
There are test failures.
--
You received this message because this project is confi
Updates:
Labels: NeedsReview
Comment #12 on issue 2625 by skirpic...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/2510
--
You received this message because this project is configur
Comment #11 on issue 2625 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
But
In [89]: Interval(-oo,oo).contains(I)
Out[89]: ⅈ > -∞ ∧ ⅈ < ∞
and even things like I > 2 still work.
--
You received this message becau
Comment #10 on issue 2625 by skirpic...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
Probably, this bug could be closed:
In [5]: I in Interval(-oo,oo)
-
Comment #8 on issue 2625 by alfr...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
That's the kind of thing I mean =). I am not really advocating either way.
I was more pointing out that OP's suggestion is both reasonable and
Comment #7 on issue 2625 by asmeurer: Imaginary unit in R, ordering of
complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
That's really only a problem if the comparison operator is required to be
compatible with the field operations for other reasons.
It is a problem. T
Comment #6 on issue 2625 by alfr...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
Yeah, you can't make the complex numbers into an ordered field. That's
really only a problem if the comparison operator is required to be
co
Comment #5 on issue 2625 by asmeurer: Imaginary unit in R, ordering of
complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
You can define any number of total orderings on the set of complex numbers,
but none of these will be algebraic orders. This is true even if you limit
Comment #4 on issue 2625 by matt...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
Just to note this: we use the following ordering when sorting expressions
(involving imaginary unit):
In [1]: sorted([2 + 3*I, 2 + I, I, -I,
Comment #3 on issue 2625 by alfr...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R,
ordering of complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
Actually, this is not even true. We should probably raise an error with
that, just as Python does
Lexicographic ordering is a natural choic
Comment #2 on issue 2625 by asmeurer: Imaginary unit in R, ordering of
complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
I suppose there is a natural ordering of the purely imaginary numbers but
statements such as '5*I < 6*I' and 'I*4 > I' do not return Boolean values.
Updates:
Status: Accepted
Labels: WrongResult Assumptions
Comment #1 on issue 2625 by asmeurer: Imaginary unit in R, ordering of
complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
This is because we have in the class Infinity:
def __le__(a, b):
i
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 2625 by arthur.n...@gmail.com: Imaginary unit in R, ordering of
complex numbers
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2625
Sorry if this has already been reported; I searched open issues but didn't
see this one.
13 matches
Mail list logo
