Comment #9 on issue 1936 by smichr: Integral limits should be sanitized
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1936
The None for a limit was introduced by
03f56ccc82cfe15e5bed5fcdf896fd1231f49a52:
"Changed Integral so that it can evaluate only the upper or lower limit".
This patch
actually weans the user away from entering a non-sympy None by giving them
a useful
shortcut for the Maple "intat" behavior, viz. Integral(x, (x, a)) instead
of the
Integral(x, (x, None, a)) that is presently required to obtain this
behavior.
In addition, this patch
1) introduces nothing new internally to the Integral; the None problem
exists and is
already being handled by existing code.
2) doesn't encourage anything new to the user i.e. the user is not
encouraged to use
None as an argument (though if they look the tests for integrals,
test_issue1566(),
they will see that such limits are allowed).
and
3) cleans up the input where a double None is entered, interpreting that as
an
indefinite integral instead of two identical limits as now:
>>> Integral(x,(x,None,None)).doit()
0
I'm +1 (but I can't vote on this one).
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy-issues" group.
To post to this group, send email to sympy-iss...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sympy-issues+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sympy-issues?hl=en.
