Hello, On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 08:15:12AM -0500, Matthew Rocklin wrote: > > I agree with Julien that vectorization is a different question. The > question at hand is (I think) the following: > > We have a function simplify that tries to reduce the complexity of a scalar > expression (for example by turning y* x / y into x). We have grown > accustomed to asking SymPy to reduce the complexity of an object by calling > `simplify(object)`. Should we extend the meaning of simplify to non-Exprs? > Many classes know some way to reduce their complexity. For example matrices > have a Matrix.simplify() method. Some sets like Union and Intersection have > a Set.reduce() method. Should we expose these methods through simplify? > I.e. do we want things like the following to work `simplify(Set)` ?
I think `simplify(Set)` should work. I do believe however that the simplification functionality itself should be provided by the object on which `simplify` is invoked, rather than stuffed into `simplify`. (I think the majority agree that this is way to go, so I'm just redundantly restating the fact.) I think letting `simplify` work on all kinds of SymPy objects is the behaviour a user would expect. Sergiu -- 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.
