Sorry for the late reply. You should take a look at the work that is being done at https://github.com/sympy/sympy/pull/2508.
Also remember that for GSoC there is a patch requirement (pardon me if you already submitted one; I'm still sifting through emails). Aaron Meurer On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Rigel Bezerra de Melo <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > First I quick introduction. My name is Rigel Bezerra de Melo, I am a senior > Computer Science student at Federal University of Campina Grande, in Brazil. > I am really into Algorithms and Data Structures. As a hobby, I like contests > like TopCoder, Codeforces, etc. As previous professional experience, I have > interned last year at Microsoft. Also, I have studied abroad at UC Berkeley. > > I really really want to do a GSoC with you guys. I always thought the > symbolic capabilities of Mathematica were awesome, but always looked for > alternatives, as I am FOSS enthusiast. I came across sympy a few months ago, > while doing stuff in graph theory (yeah, I know, sympy doesn't have graph > theory capabilities). Soon I discovered the number theory features and was > amazed. > > By far, the project idea the really strike me as working in the Assumptions > system. I know this system will be highly tied to the Set Theory system, as > lots of people have already pointed out. But I think you guys are all > thinking the inverse way of organizing it. It looked to me like you guys > wants to do the Set Theory system dependent of the Assumptions system, but > it should be the other way around! My idea of what would be a perfect > organization of Assumptions, Set Theory an Formal Logic is: > > 1. Formal Logic system is the base for everything. It is totally > independent. In its core, it will have Propositions, and will decide on > them. > > 2. Set theory system depends on the Formal Logic one. I think the most > useful feature of Sets in symbolic calculations is testing pertinence. I > mean, I think that by far, that would be the most common ultimate goal of > using it. Having it depending on the Formal Logic allow as to construct Sets > from Propositions (the Set of all elements the satisfies the Proposition). > The would make the code of deciding pertinence only a matter of calling the > Formal Logic system to check satisfaction. > > 3. The assumptions system should depends on the Set Theory system. I think > that, in the core, all assumptions should be of the type "x in S", where S > is a Set. That would have 2 advantages. First, the code for assumptions is > already done, because all we have to do now is convert Expressions to Set > pertinence assumptions (things like "x > y" = "x-y in Z+", "x in A" and "x > in B" = "x in A^B"). Asking would them be only a matter of evaluating > pertinence, what would call the formal logic system to decide satisfaction > over propositions, that is the guy that should know about this kind o thing. > The second advantage is that, now that there is not much logic left in the > assumptions system, we can spread the assumptions everywhere. I mean, all > packages should add their our set of assumptions. There is a prime_number > basic assumption, but prime numbers make only sense in the number theory > context. Is number theory special? Is there other number theory assumptions > that should be added? Is there other packages with "same importance" > assumptions? To me, the answer is No, No and No. I think the right way to do > it is, the number theory module have Prime Number Set, them a prime_number > assumption based on this set. Now, with you care about prime numbers and > stuff, you import the number theory package, and get it all. > > I know those ideas may be a little bit of diverging from what you guys are > building. That's why I would like to work on the assumptions system now (it > seems like you guys need help removing the old system). That way I would get > a deeper understanding of the assumptions system and re-work these ideas in > my head. > > Sorry for the long message. > > Thanks. > > -- > 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. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/64097194-e7b1-4119-b167-4aa4c5c53e73%40googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAKgW%3D6LUoD7C4v2GedKnMzDR0F_m_92qwAT9iyKAnRoy3esNzQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
