Comment #13 on issue 3095 by julien.r...@gmail.com: Set.contains should
behave symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
Not sure what you intend to point out with your code snippet; it was
mentioned already that .as_relational does return a symbolic object but
Comment #14 on issue 3095 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
I personally think .contains should return its own kind of symbolic object,
which doesn't necessarily replace as_relational. They both could be
Comment #15 on issue 3095 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
The set of integers being a trivial example.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
sympy-issues group.
To
Updates:
Blockedon: -sympy:2070 sympy:2070
Comment #11 on issue 3095 by julien.r...@gmail.com: Set.contains should
behave symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
Even with sets with only numerical values, we still have the issue
that .contains isn't
Comment #12 on issue 3095 by mrock...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
In [1]: s = FiniteSet(1,2,3)
In [2]: s.as_relational(x)
Out[2]: x = 1 ∨ x = 2 ∨ x = 3
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
Updates:
Status:
Comment #10 on issue 3095 by smi...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1088 has been committed. Can this issue
be closed?
--
You received this message because
Comment #8 on issue 3095 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Set.contains should
behave symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
OK, I guess that's the best we can do for now. I've sent
https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1088 which should be enough to deal
with the
Comment #7 on issue 3095 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
And I realise I forgot to mention that .as_relational() should be
deprecated, since it does exactly the same thing as .contains()
Well, if we get a
Comment #3 on issue 3095 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Set.contains should
behave symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
We only need In/Contains for handling symbolic sets. At present, we only
have sets with concrete values, so we can do without it.
--
You received
Comment #4 on issue 3095 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
I must be missing something. How do we symbolically represent
FiniteSet(0).contains(x) without a symbolic contains object? Do you plan
to just do
Comment #5 on issue 3095 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Set.contains should
behave symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
That should just be Eq(x, 0), which is already what
FiniteSet(0).as_relational(x) returns.
And I realise I forgot to mention that
Status: Started
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 3095 by ronan.l...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
ATM, Set.contains is inconsistent in its symbolic vs concrete semantics.
Things like
Issue 3095: Set.contains should behave symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
This issue is now blocking issue 2531.
See http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=2531
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue,
Comment #2 on issue 3095 by asmeu...@gmail.com: Set.contains should behave
symbolically
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3095
I think we would need an In() object to make that work (or Contains() if
you want to call it that). I thought we had an issue for that, but I can't
14 matches
Mail list logo
