Well, there are some advantages to having your objects in a Tuple.
The methods/properties .has, .subs, .match, .free_symbols, .args,
.find, .replace, .is_Anything, and many others all work on it, because
it's Basic.

Aaron Meurer

On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Chris Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Aaron Meurer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This is kind of an obscure argument.  We need to decide what the API
>> should be so that it's consistant and useful.
>
> :-) So let's stop talking about it. We have a consistent and useful
> API. Let's not change it unless we can show an advantage to sending
> back containers other than python's standard ones. Other than the
> lamish suggestion I made, I like keeping in mind that I'm in python
> and sympy is not about containers, it's about mathematical objects. So
> operations that return an iterable of some sort shouldn't make it a
> sympy iterable unless there is a compelling reason to do so. There is
> nothing inherently mathematical about a Tuple object over a tuple
> object, so I say, let's not start tying Gordian knots.
>
> I can be persuaded if there is a compelling advantage to having Tuples
> as output instead of tuples. (But I actually think this is a
> discussion that can wait until v 1.0...we have a lot more pressing
> things than to start worrying about this, don't you think?)
>
> --
> 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.
>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to