#6756: [with patch, needs review] Implement ``diff`` format symbolic derivative 
in
new symbolics
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  gmhossain       |       Owner:                       
     Type:  enhancement     |      Status:  new                  
 Priority:  major           |   Milestone:                       
Component:  symbolics       |    Keywords:                       
 Reviewer:  Nick Alexander  |      Author:  Golam Mortuza Hossain
   Merged:                  |  
----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------

Comment(by gmhossain):

 Replying to [comment:12 burcin]:
 > Replying to [comment:11 gmhossain]:
 >  For example. consider the substitution: f(y,y) = y
 >
 > This substitution doesn't make sense mathematically.

 Hmm, if you bring mathematical sense into argument then does it
 make mathematical sense asking for applying chain rule at the
 first place for this case?

 > Note that with these patches, the result of `f(y,y).diff(y)` is twice
 that of the current implementation.

 This is not accurate.

 Above will happen only when an user wants to apply chain rule by
 explicitly setting
 diff_derivative_level to "2" or more and certainly NOT in default diff
 level of "1".
 If some user wants to use some setting that are not default then its
 reasonable to
 expect users to read the documentation to be aware of the assumptions
 associated with
 the settings.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6756#comment:13>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to