-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 480
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
propagate the variable domain to the assumptions database #18695
Comments
Author: Ralf Stephan |
New commits:
|
Commit: |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
comment:7
Together with #18877 this should be able to doctest:
|
Dependencies: #18877 |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Reviewer: Vincent Delecroix |
comment:11
Hello, It looks good. Though I found confusing that the functions |
Changed branch from u/rws/setting_domain_integer_on_var_has_no_effect_with_solve to |
While this works as expected:
this does not:
So, either
solve
should also look at the variable domain, or better, let's propagate domain settings to the assumption list.Also:
Creating a non-complex var will invoke Maxima with this. I think this is acceptable for now. Alternatively, examine if assumptions can be done lazily, i.e., before any call to Maxima.
Depends on #18877
Component: symbolics
Author: Ralf Stephan
Branch/Commit:
c142a5f
Reviewer: Vincent Delecroix
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18695
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: