Hi Oscar,

Should we add all the ODEs of Kamke and Murphy or only Riccati ODEs? In 
either case, how do we plan on parsing the solution from Maple/Mathematica? 
I could see that there is a Mathematica Parser, but even that seems to be 
very basic and is not parsing some complex expressions.

Naveen
On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 7:17:25 PM UTC+5:30 Naveen Saisreenivas Thota 
wrote:

> > When reviewing GSOC applications (just speaking for myself - I am not
> > the only reviewer) I am most interested in ensuring that we can get
> > the best contributors who are capable of making the most valuable
> > contributions to important parts of SymPy. What you are proposing here
> > is a significant improvement to an important part of SymPy so the main
> > points to focus on in your application are:
> > 1) making it clear why this is important and how significant the 
> improvement is
> > 2) demonstrating that you personally understand what needs doing and
> > are capable of doing the necessary work
>
> Okay, thank you for the advice, Oscar! I'll make the proposal and post it 
> here so that you and others can review it.
>
> Naveen
> On Monday, March 29, 2021 at 5:03:53 PM UTC+5:30 Oscar wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2021 at 10:42, Naveen Saisreenivas Thota 
>> <[email protected]> wrote: 
>> > 
>> > > I think you underestimate how much work is involved in really making 
>> > > the implementation robust and complete. Note that it's much better to 
>> > > have a well-tested, complete, efficient implementation of a single 
>> > > algorithm with nicely organised and documented code than it is to 
>> have 
>> > > multiple half-implemented algorithms. As Nijso emphasised earlier the 
>> > > most important thing first is to establish a systematic test base. We 
>> > > should get the Kamke examples in and you should verify that this does 
>> > > find all the rational function solutions for all of the Ricatti ODEs. 
>> > 
>> > I was thinking as much, but I wanted to ask just to know your opinion 
>> as well. I did test the current code with some examples, but I am yet to 
>> test it with all of them. So, from what you say, I am planning to include 
>> Rational Riccati Solver and ODE test bank (Kamke and Murphy) as the primary 
>> items to be done and leave computation of rational solutions for a general 
>> 1st order equation as a bonus? Will this be okay? 
>>
>> Yes, I think that sounds good. 
>>
>> Note, as I said in reply to some other queries about GSOC exactly what 
>> you would or wouldn't achieve within the duration of the project is 
>> less important than demonstrating that you are capable of making 
>> significant contributions to SymPy. All tasks can turn out to be 
>> harder or easier than expected so it's hard to estimate in advance 
>> what is possible given a fixed timeframe. 
>>
>> When reviewing GSOC applications (just speaking for myself - I am not 
>> the only reviewer) I am most interested in ensuring that we can get 
>> the best contributors who are capable of making the most valuable 
>> contributions to important parts of SymPy. What you are proposing here 
>> is a significant improvement to an important part of SymPy so the main 
>> points to focus on in your application are: 
>> 1) making it clear why this is important and how significant the 
>> improvement is 
>> 2) demonstrating that you personally understand what needs doing and 
>> are capable of doing the necessary work 
>>
>> Then if your application is successful and it turns out that (based on 
>> the work you have already done) it is not hard to complete some of the 
>> tasks listed then there is no shortage of other things to be done for 
>> ODEs in SymPy. On the other hand if one of the tasks turns out to be 
>> more involved than expected then it is better to limit the scope of 
>> the project later and make sure that the parts that are implemented 
>> are done well. 
>>
>> A general point that I often make to students is that (usually) it is 
>> better to do half a job well than to do the whole job badly. If half a 
>> job is done well then it makes a good starting point for someone in 
>> future to finish that work. If the whole job is done badly it 
>> potentially makes it more difficult for someone else to improve that 
>> work than it would be for them if starting from scratch. 
>>
>> Oscar 
>>
>

-- 
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/d9074bf9-84a4-427c-9d47-e7fc0657dbcdn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to