On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Fredrik Johansson <fredrik.johans...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Tom Bachmann <e_mc...@web.de> wrote: >> Actually how does this relate to the following wiki page: >> >> https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/Algebras-in-SymPyCore > > It's roughly the same thing.
I also think that what Fredrik says might be a good idea. I don't have much experience with this to have a clear opinion though. The reason I have just used Add/Mul/Pow classes for everything in SymPy (long time ago) is that it is conceptually a super simple idea, and it got us very far. E.g. from the Zen of Python: 1) Simple is better than complex (Add/Mul/Pow is simpler than all the algebras+other machinery) 2) Complex is better than complicated (the algebras are probably better than the complicated entangled assumptions+cache) As such, I now that we can get very fast just with Add/Mul/Pow (see the csympy code: https://github.com/certik/csympy), and when using Refine() and other things, we should be able to have core not using assumptions nor cache, be fast, and using the new assumptions in refine(). That fixes the current sympy, using pretty much the same architecture. Fredrik+Pearu's approach might be a better approach, looking at things from a different angle, as Fredrik says, it might not be that difficult to use. I still think though, that we should first get assumptions out of the core, and then we can either just use csympy, or we can switch to Fredrik+Pearu's approach. Ondrej -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
