Opened 12 years ago

Closed 10 years ago

# update desolve_laplace like #4285 did for desolve

Reported by: Owned by: jason burcin major sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix calculus mhansen, jdemeyer Robert Mařík N/A

### Description

Make it so that the following works:

```sage: var('t')
t
sage: x=function('x', t)
sage: soln=desolve_laplace(diff(x,t)+x==1, x, ics=[0,2])
sage: soln(3)
e^-3 + 1
```

### comment:1 follow-up: ↓ 3 Changed 12 years ago by wdj

This would be awesome!

BTW, ICs used with desolve really does not work: from the docstring, you see

```           sage: x = var('x')
sage: y = function('y', x)
sage: de = diff(y,x,2) - y == x
sage: desolve(de, y)
k1*e^x + k2*e^(-x) - x
sage: f = desolve(de, y, [10,2,1]); f
(e^10*y(10) + 8*e^10)*e^(-x)/2 + (y(10) +12)*e^(x - 10)/2 - x
```

so for some reason 2 is not plugged in for y(10).

### comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by AlexGhitza

• Type changed from defect to enhancement

### comment:3 in reply to: ↑ 1 Changed 12 years ago by robert.marik

BTW, ICs used with desolve really does not work: from the docstring,

has been fixed in http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6479

### comment:4 Changed 11 years ago by robert.marik

• Status changed from new to needs_info

The desolve_laplace has been fixed together with other things in http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/6479 and got positive review. Can be closed now as a duplicate.

### comment:5 follow-up: ↓ 6 Changed 11 years ago by kcrisman

To release manager: please see previous comment.

### comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 5 Changed 11 years ago by kcrisman

• Report Upstream set to N/A

To release manager: please see previous comment.

### comment:7 follow-up: ↓ 9 Changed 10 years ago by kcrisman

Bump again - release manager, please close :)

### comment:8 Changed 10 years ago by mhansen

• Milestone changed from sage-4.6.1 to sage-duplicate/invalid/wontfix
• Resolution set to duplicate
• Status changed from needs_info to closed

Fixed by #6479.

### comment:9 in reply to: ↑ 7 Changed 10 years ago by jdemeyer

• Reviewers set to Karl-Dieter Crisman

Bump again - release manager, please close :)

Next time, just make the ticket reviewed (put it to needs_review asking somebody to confirm to close the ticket).

This way we have a peer-reviewed proposal to close and the release manager will see that the ticket has positive_review.

### comment:10 follow-up: ↓ 11 Changed 10 years ago by kcrisman

• Reviewers changed from Karl-Dieter Crisman to Robert Marik

Okay, that's different from how we've handled closing of duplicates in the past. After all, there is nothing to review in this case.

Anyway, no problem - but in that case let me change the reviewer! (I can't do the diacritical mark in Robert's name, though.)

### comment:11 in reply to: ↑ 10 ; follow-up: ↓ 12 Changed 10 years ago by jdemeyer

• Reviewers changed from Robert Marik to Robert Mařík

Okay, that's different from how we've handled closing of duplicates in the past. After all, there is nothing to review in this case.

Well, I myself have gotten complaints about closing tickets (for whatever reason) when not being a release manager. I also think it is good to review the fact that the bug is indeed invalid.

I can't do the diacritical mark in Robert's name, though.

Copy and paste from http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/#AccountNamesmappedtoRealNames :-)

### comment:12 in reply to: ↑ 11 Changed 10 years ago by kcrisman

Okay, that's different from how we've handled closing of duplicates in the past. After all, there is nothing to review in this case.

Well, I myself have gotten complaints about closing tickets (for whatever reason) when not being a release manager.

Yes, as have I; I think that only having release managers (or possibly experienced non-current release managers like Mike and Minh) actually close the tickets is wise.

But in this case, you *are* the release manager! As Robin Williams says in 'Aladdin', "Phenomenal cosmic powers! Itty bitty living space."

I also think it is good to review the fact that the bug is indeed invalid.

Of course, one should review that a bug is invalid, but in this case it is the duplicate status that is at issue, which is more of a release issue. Anyway, I don't mind Robert getting more props!

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.