Comment #3 on issue 1309 by fabian.seoane: implement backward chaining for
rules
http://code.google.com/p/sympy/issues/detail?id=1309
not quite correct. The old assumption system solves the absence of
backward-chaining
with lot's of assumption-specific code, which is in my opinion the start of
all our
problems.
If I implement the new assumption system without this (i could), it will
inevitably
have some of the issues the old system has:
- fragility
- lot's of verbose code
I think i could implement a naive version of backward-chaining just be able
to
continue with the new assumptions ...
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
You may adjust your issue notification preferences at:
http://code.google.com/hosting/settings
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy-issues" 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/sympy-issues?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
