Am 10.11.2013 23:21, schrieb F. B.:
But, isn't this breaking the logical correspondence of those two points in
the bullet list? The plus sign is no more mapped to a single object, while
the properties of addition are sometimes handled by Add, sometimes by other
objects.
Not 100% sure that we're in the same boat here.
My perspective is that since we need to have a way to see all the cases
so that we can check for omissions and conflicts, "+" as such needs to
be represented in some way. (In theory, it doesn't even need to be
represented as data, it could be a piece of code.)
However, since this is getting large and unwieldy, I'd want to see the
dispatch table held somewhere centrally but the implementations could
(and probably should) be held in separate modules.
What about using instead of this an approach closer to C++ templates?
The problem with C++ is that many people do not know C++, and those that
believe they do sometimes misinterpret the definitions.
For that reason, it is usually better to stick with Python nomenclature
and concepts.
> I mean, the Add class would always represent a plus sign, for every
expression, while its properties are managed by templates,
Here, the question would be how you'd represent those templates would be
in Python.
I do not think that the proposal can be properly understood without that.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
