> I want results of operations with sage objects to be sage objects. This is > the same as it is with python objects now: > sage_int+python_int=python_int+sage_int=sage_int > Very simply, this is because I'm a sage user not a sympy user. I think that > the sage SymbolicExpressionRing needs to have the extra functionality to > properly wrap (i.e. in a sage-ish way) the sympy functionality. If we want > to use sympy as a back-end to implement these things (much like we do with > maxima), that's great. I realize that this is probably a longer term goal. > If we need a sub-optimal fix along the journey to get there, that may be > fine.
I agree with this, that working in SAGE should produce SAGE objects, not sympy objects. I am just thinking how to do it cleanly. > Sorry Ondrej, I certainly don't mean this as a strike against sympy. I think > it's a great project and I want sage and sympy to co-exist. However, one of > the beautiful things about sage (to me at least) is the pristine consistent > object hierarchy which neatly masks the many pieces behind it. I don't want > that compromised. > > (In reality, I think that sympy and sage should simply merge. However, I > don't know enough about sympy to know how feasible that is. I put this in > parenthesis, because I fear it's kind of a demeaning thing to say. I don't > mean it that way though. It just feels like they are natural complements of > each other. The whole would be greater than the sum of it's parts.) The problem with SAGE is that it is huge. And for many people it is just too huge. So finding ways to create SAGE more modular is the way to go imho. And it will happen - the notebook and maxima wrappers will eventually be released separately. So I myself definitely don't want to create something, so that users would need to choose - either SAGE or sympy. That would be very, very bad. But on the other hand, I want to have a small library for calculus, easy to use and easy to install and especially easy to extend. To give you another application, right now we are discussing how to do symbolic finite elements with sympy: http://groups.google.com/group/sympy/browse_thread/thread/f73b00d1bdf0255a using SAGE for it is not an option, as long as it is 150MB install. However, the whole thing can of course be included in SAGE. And honestly, I don't think SAGE calculus can be based on sympy anytime soon, it's just too slow. But I still believe sympy is the way to go in the long term, otherwise I wouldn't be doing it, right. :) So maxima should be default in SAGE, while sympy being an option for people who want to try it, if it works for them better than maxima. BTW, I am still waiting for an answer to this: http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel/browse_thread/thread/2308561f175a0674/906f9b991c68de06?lnk=gst&q=sympy#906f9b991c68de06 the two examples at the end - those are things that I don't know how to do easily in maxima. Ondrej --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
