On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:37 PM, Aaron S. Meurer <[email protected]> wrote: > I for one think we should keep sympify() (and the S() shortcut). sympify() > gives a nice character to SymPy, as a function named after it. I certainly > don't see why you would want to delete sympify() and just keep S(). How is > that better than just keeping sympify() but always using S()? And besides, > 'sympify' is almost guaranteed to be unique to any namespace it is imported > into, whereas this is likely not the case for 'S'.
After thinking about it for a while, I think you are right, we should probably keep both. > > One thing I think we do need to do though is to make sympify() more prevalent > in the docs. I have seen more than one instance on the internet where > someone was trying to write their own equation parser for SymPy because they > didn't know about the existence of the sympify() function. Yes, we need to improve our docs for sure. Ondrej -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sympy?hl=en.
