-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 565
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
Symbolic limit #22844
Comments
Branch: u/rws/symbolic_limit |
Commit: |
Author: Ralf Stephan |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
comment:5
Doctest failures in |
comment:6
The latex conversion would be easily fixed. However, the fails show that there is the problem that the limit function can have either 3 or 4 arguments, the latter with an additional direction. I don't think Sage can handle this at the moment without tuples as arguments like in EDIT: it may be possible to use two functions; checks elsewhere would then have to be done with both. The Maxima interface would have to know about it. |
comment:7
Maybe it is excusable in this case to write a customized |
comment:9
Much easier: |
comment:10
Needs a rebase over the latest |
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
|
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw |
comment:13
LGTM. |
comment:14
Thanks. |
Changed branch from u/rws/symbolic_limit to |
Equivalently to #21645 a symbolic limit function is needed, in this case #20179 supposes that expressions can be searched for unexpanded limit functions which is not possible if it is anonymous.
CC: @EmmanuelCharpentier
Component: symbolics
Author: Ralf Stephan
Branch/Commit:
ce95d01
Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/22844
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: