Yes, I have been thinking about that too. I didn't find a workaround to that problem. I'll take a look at the link you have given.
Thank you for the reply On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:37 AM, Aaron Meurer <asmeu...@gmail.com> wrote: > You may want to look at > https://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=3560 and some of the > ideas for a unified solve object. Already you have the issue that you > are returning a parameter, but there is no easy way to access that > parameter (and what happens if t is one of the variables?). > > Aaron Meurer > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Thilina Rathnayake > <thilina.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > Before continuing further with the Diophantine module development (PR > #2168) > > I thought it would be better for me to get other people's views on the > > representation > > of solutions returned by diop_solve(). > > > > The main routine of the module is diop_solve(), which takes a Diophantine > > equation > > as an argument and returns the solution of the equation. Currently the > > solution is > > returned as a dictionary. Ex: > > > >> >>>diop_solve(4*x + 6*y - 4) > >> {x: 6*t - 2, y: -4*t + 2} > >> >>>diop_solve(3*x - 5*y + 7*z -5) > >> {x: -25*t - 14*z + 10, y: -15*t - 7*z + 5, z: z} > > > > > > Everything works fine here because the solutions are parametric. > > > > But when I was trying to solve quadratic Diophantine equation ( this has > the > > form > > Ax**2 + Bxy + Cy**2 + Dx + Ey + F), they involve solutions which are not > > parametric. > > For example, the equation 2*x*y + 5*x + 56*y + 7 = 0 (which is a special > > case of the > > quadratic equation) has 8 solution pairs (x, y). (-27, 64), (-29, -69), > > (-21, 7) and five more. > > > > To represent these in a dictionary which has the above form, we have to > > split the solution > > pair and put it in to two lists which are keyed under x and y in the > dict. > > if the user want > > to retrieve a solution pair he would have to find the x value and the y > > value of the solution > > separately. Returned value would look like, > > > >> {x: [-27, -29, -21, ...], y: [64, -69, 7, ...]} > > > > > > Is this a good way to cope with this situation? I personally feel that > it is > > not natural to > > split a solution pair and enable the access of it's elements separately. > > > > I would like to know what the others have to say on this. > > > > Regards, > > Thilina > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "sympy" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > > email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com. > > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sympy" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sympy@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
