Hi Robert, I'm not sure practically what it would mean to allow for custom topologies. If it only affects things like is_closed, boundary etc then there could be a function added to use different topologies like closure(some_set, some_topology).
Besides the usual topology on the reals, which topologies would be computationally useful? Oscar On Sat, 27 Jul 2024 at 10:20, Robert Simione <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello all, > I was reading the Sympy documentation on Sets which is under the Logic > section of the documentation, but a LOT the properties discussed like > boundaries and closures are only definable when there is a topology defined. > It's clear a lot of work in Sympy has been done on sets over numbers so of > course there is an inherited topology, but I wonder if there is either a way > to extend the Set module to allow for custom topologies, or perhaps the > documentation should be changed to at least be more explicit that the Set > module is focused very heavily on sets of numbers with their usual > topologies. I also just wanted to open up the conversation if anyone else has > thoughts on this, I searched for "topology" in the mailing list archive and > found surprisingly little. > Best, > Robert > > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/e3bb2149-bad1-475b-80cd-81e206910524n%40googlegroups.com. -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAHVvXxQLKMxQO8ohLmd3gscWS1FxSXwQSr9pta8V%2BrDCHOhM%3DA%40mail.gmail.com.
