On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Devin Jeanpierre
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Nathan Rice
> wrote:
>> I'm interested in fixing both issues. I believe both issues I've had
>> could be solved by having a robust "symbolic object". These objects
>> would basically usable like ordinary
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Nathan Rice
wrote:
> I'm interested in fixing both issues. I believe both issues I've had
> could be solved by having a robust "symbolic object". These objects
> would basically usable like ordinary objects, however upon any
> attribute access or other form of int
>> I have been writing a lot of code lately that involves creating
>> symbolic expressions of one form or another, which are then fully
>> evaluated at a later time. Examples of this include Elementwise,
>
>
> Python is designed for concrete, rather than symbolic computation. But the
> latter has
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 1/12/2012 3:45 PM, Nathan Rice wrote:
> print isinstance(3, const)
>>
>> True
>
>
> A Contraints instance defines a set. 'const' is the set 'odd_ge_3'
> It would look better if you used standard syntax and do the inclusion check
> in a
