Le lundi 14 mai 2012 à 22:26 +0200, [email protected] a écrit : > This week I am making some choices on the structure of my gsoc > project. I am trying to prepare something to show to my mentor > (Matthew) in order to have his preliminary feedback (I am not yet > ready). > > One of the issues is how to create application objects - something > that takes a symbol and returns some expression containing the symbol. > > An idea that I like it to have something like `MyConstructor(arg, > expr_containing_arg)`. Then I substitute `arg` with a `Dummy` and > store the `expr_containing_arg.subs(arg, dummy)`. Something like > symbolic `lambda`. > This is basically the description of Lambda. Why can't you just use it? (Or subclass it?)
> It works great, but my question is whether this is an antipattern I > was not aware of? After implementing it I checked out the code for > `Lambda` and it does something similar so it should be ok. > > All this is not to be confused with `lambdify` which has absolutely > nothing in common. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" 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?hl=en.
