On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 12:51 PM, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote: > > Ondrej Certik wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Maurizio <maurizio.gran...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> We managed to get one gsoc project that does the assumptions right, so >>>> it may happen anyways over the summer, in fact I very much hope so. >>>> >>> How does assumptions affect this? If that's so important, you should >>> probably get a lot of focus on that! But consider also PDE >>> important ;) >> >> PDE's are of course important, also it's my main research thing, but >> for sympy the assumptions are essential, because you cannot build a >> more advanced symbolics without a good assumption system. I am >> curious which approach Sage is going to use for this, since ginac >> doesn't have any assumptions.
Could you explain how assumptions are so important? Could you particularly address how they can (1) be so critically important, and yet (2) ginac doesn't have them. Incidentaly, to me they are particularly important in symbolic integration, which ginac doesn't do. Also, could you explain why the assumption system in Sympy needs to be rewritten -- in particular, what design decisions were suboptimal? -- William > > > Is there anyone working on an assumptions framework in Sage? On the one > hand, you can work in certain domains in Sage (i.e., polynomials over > QQ, etc.), so some of this need may be taken care of there. > > But for a more general framework (like declaring that x>0?) > Hmmm...maybe we'll use sympy? :) > > Jason > > -- > Jason Grout > > > > > -- William Stein Associate Professor of Mathematics University of Washington http://wstein.org --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://www.sagemath.org -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
