On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 11:38 PM, Tom Bachmann <re...@reply.github.com> wrote: > @smichr specifically: From the examples you show, I agree there does not seem > to be a problem with combsimp any more. > @smichr generally: *awesome* work.
Thanks...now I've got to do some awesome work here! Before checking out on this, I should note that the mult_thm apparently requires that the args be sorted like `[gamma(x-1/2), gamma(x), gamma(x+1/3)...]`. I can show that the current implementation will fail when this is not the case. I've never seen it fail with the current sorting. In case you want to consider a more robust algorithm, see my combsimp2 branch. I did a quick look at the references but didn't have time to see how that multiplication theorem works out for sequences like `gamma(x-2/3)*gamma(x)*gamma(x+2/3)`...and I know you've worked it out but I don't have any more time to continue now. Maybe next week. So for now, I think what we have is good. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/1462#issuecomment-7533948 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy-patches" group. To post to this group, send email to sympy-patches@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy-patches+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
