We also created swiginac (http://swiginac.berlios.de/), for those, who are interested in using ginac from python. The difference is that pyginac uses boost-python, and swiginac swig for doing the wrapping. just my opinion: boost-python took ages to compile on my machine and the errors were completely unreadable. swig compiles much faster, and also it seems easier to learn. Do others have similar experience, or totally different? Ondrej On 7/19/06, Vladimir Kisil <kisilv@maths.leeds.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear All,
Recently Daniel Seidel produced a Python wrapper for my "cycle" library announced here on Wed Dec 28 11:16:33 CET 2005. The wrapper is based on the pyGiNaC (http://sourceforge.net/projects/pyginac/) and is an example how a derived GiNaC libraries may be used in the interactive mode. The wrapper can be found here:
http://www.maths.leeds.ac.uk/~kisilv/pycycle.html
If you are curious what cycles are, then an easy-reading (I hope ;-) overview is here (http://arxiv.org/abs/math.GM/0607387)
Best wishes, Vladimir -- Vladimir V. Kisil email: kisilv@maths.leeds.ac.uk -- www: http://maths.leeds.ac.uk/~kisilv/ _______________________________________________ GiNaC-list mailing list GiNaC-list@ginac.de https://www.cebix.net/mailman/listinfo/ginac-list