It would be great to have the REPL.jl fork submitted as a PR. Even if it is not
accepted, something good will certainly come out of it.
-viral
> On 20-Apr-2015, at 11:34 pm, Marcus Appelros <marcus.appel...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Currently some modifications to REPL.jl are needed, there is a fork
> made which does exactly that.
>
> Am trying to test some of the examples in the SJulia readme, keep in
> mind that this is on a old sourcebuilt 0.4 master.
>
> ```
> julia> m= @ex Expand((a+b)^10)
> Expand((a + b) ^ 10)
>
> julia> m[2]
> ERROR: BoundsError()
> in getindex at /home/quin/SJulia/src/mxpr_type.jl:267
> ```
>
> Apparently the only method found is:
>
> ```
> julia> t= @ex (a+b)^10
> (a + b) ^ 10
>
> julia> typeof(t)
> Mxpr{Power}
>
> julia> tt=SJulia.mxpr(:Expand,t)
> Expand((a + b) ^ 10)
>
> julia> ttt=typeof(tt)
> Mxpr{Expand}
>
> julia> methods(SJulia.apprules,(ttt,))
> 1-element Array{Any,1}:
> apprules(x) at /home/quin/SJulia/src/apprules.jl:9
> ```
>
> Which is set to equal x. Also there's this:
>
> ```
> julia> function f(n);@ex Expand((a+b)^n);end
> f (generic function with 1 method)
>
> julia> f(3)
> Expand((a + b) ^ n)
> ```
>
> The Fibbonacci example does work.
>
> On 20 April 2015 at 19:14, Viral Shah <vi...@mayin.org> wrote:
>> Would it be possible to install SJulia as a Julia package, and switch
>> between SJulia and Julia - kind of like how we have the help> and the shell>
>> prompts, which can be activated with ? and ;
>>
>> -viral
>>
>>
>> On Monday, April 20, 2015 at 5:46:08 PM UTC+5:30, lapeyre....@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Here is SJulia
>>>
>>> https://github.com/jlapeyre/SJulia
>>>
>>> sjulia> f = (x^y + y^z + z^x)^3
>>> (x ^ y + y ^ z + z ^ x) ^ 3
>>>
>>> sjulia> f = (x^y + y^z)^3
>>> (x ^ y + y ^ z) ^ 3
>>>
>>> sjulia> g = Expand(f)
>>> x ^ (3 * y) + 3 * (x ^ (2 * y)) * (y ^ z) + 3 * (x ^ y) * (y ^ (2 * z)) +
>>> y ^ (3 * z)
>>>
>>> SJulia is very close in spirit to Mathematica (Wolfram). This is more or
>>> less a language written in Julia,
>>> although it can be made to communicate well with Julia. From the user's
>>> perspective, there are advantages and disadvantages to
>>> implementing symbolic capability as an extension to languages like Julia
>>> or Python rather than as
>>> another language. I think it is possible to have a language that supports
>>> both.
>>>
>>> Also, CAS can describe various software tools that are designed to do very
>>> different things. For instance, a CAS may be intended to implement more or
>>> less mathematical rigor. It may have a hierarchy of computer language types
>>> meant to represent mathematical objects. Or
>>> it may (like Mathematica, Maple, and Maxima) be based on 'expressions'
>>> that are essentially devoid of meaning. All of these distinctions,
>>> particularly the latter, regarding purpose, are typically confused in
>>> discussions on internet fora.
>>>
>>> I think that Julia is a great language for symbolic computation. Have fun!
>>> --John
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 7:47:34 PM UTC+2, Marcus Appelros wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Kevin, thanks for the link! From the end of that thread:
>>>>
>>>> "Has anybody written pure Julia symbolic math for things like:
>>>>
>>>> f = (x**y + y**z + z**x)**100
>>>> g = f.expand()"
>>>>
>>>> "As far as I know there is no Julia package which supports such symbolic
>>>> expressions and manipulation."
>>>>
>>>> Now there is!
>>>>
>>>> Saw a more recent dev discussion calling for someone to write a package
>>>> like this. Have looked through the package list many times and never found
>>>> anything that appeared alike the vision of Equations, SymPy has some common
>>>> functionality however certainly didn't start developing in Julia to use
>>>> Python.
>>>>
>>>> Developing this code is indeed very enjoying and as more of the planned
>>>> features become released a solid user base will be established, have
>>>> expanded the todolist with an impelling to read the discussion in your link
>>>> so as to hasten the construction of such a foundation, as per your
>>>> recommendation.
>>>>
>>>> With love. <3
