#11445: symbolic integration fails on a very simple test case
--------------------------------------------------------------+-------------
Reporter: pdehaye | Owner:
burcin
Type: defect | Status:
positive_review
Priority: major | Milestone:
sage-5.0
Component: calculus | Resolution:
Keywords: integrate | Work issues:
Report Upstream: Fixed upstream, in a later stable release. | Reviewers:
Karl-Dieter Crisman
Authors: Michael Orlitzky | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
--------------------------------------------------------------+-------------
Comment (by mjo):
I honestly went through the same thought process. At first, I thought,
"I'll put it with the Maxima stuff because it was a Maxima bug." But then
I thought, what if we ever drop Maxima completely? This isn't a ''Maxima''
test: this tests that our integration works. Whatever we would replace
Maxima with should also pass this test!
Then, I had to decide whether to put it in functional.py or under
symbolics. I settled on this because it's what gets called first when the
user calls `integrate()`. It's also where you're sent if you look up the
code with `integrate?` or `integrate??`, so to stay true to the report on
the ticket, I put it there.
If the reporter had done,
{{{
f = abs(x - 1) + abs(x + 1) - 2*abs(x)
f.integral(...)
}}}
I probably would have stuck it in symbolics. It's no big deal to move it,
in any case.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/11445#comment:9>
Sage <http://www.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.
