I have a terrible way of wording things.. more of a discussion between myself and the author where he mentioned that I should ask the community what they think.
On Friday, October 23, 2015 at 6:43:51 PM UTC-4, Jason Moore wrote: > > Justin, > > I don't think there is a debate. We have a very nice vector representation > in the physics package, but it is based on mutable types and isn't very > general. We created the sympy.vector package to make a more general vector > object that was based on immutable types with the idea that the physics > vector could eventually be deprecated. Our new implementation may not be > general enough for the mathematicians' taste and we are willing to improve > it so that it is, but we would still want it to eventually allow us to > deprecate sympy.physics.vector. The addition of vectors from different > coordinate systems is essential to this plan. So whatever you want to do to > improve the package will have my support but I hope that you will keep this > intended use case in mind when you think about bigger design changes. > I come from a physics background and can't see when or why this would be useful so my opinion is certainly biased. As to the generality of the package there are no constrains on doing this and, bias and all, this tells me there ought to be some. I am new to contributing so I will keep my head down and add functionality as you mentioned. I am not trying to step on toes here... I will remove the post in 10 minutes. Regards, Justin -- 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/62ee7903-d029-4c59-9a87-7d45c5354bb2%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
