On Sep 20, 6:08 pm, Nils Bruin <nbr...@sfu.ca> wrote: > It's actually just as big a problem as the third example you give:
Oh, haha, yes it is. >http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/7496 >should partly deal with the nasty bits of this problem. Great! > The assumption that var(("a","b","c")) or var (["a","b","c"]) or > var("a","b","c") should be equivalent to > var("a");var("b");var("c") > is not corroborated by the documentation... That's absolutely true. My assumption was based more what felt pythonic. I assumed that ``var`` *did* actually want multiple arguments (the names of the variables 'a', 'b', and 'c') and that 'a, b, c' was just a convenient way of passing them. I'm happy using ``tuple(var(v) for v in ('a', 'b', 'c'))`` in the future. > [note, by the way that top-level "var" has the nasty side-effect of > inserting bindings in globals(). As soon as you're using "var" in > programmatic contexts it's probably safer to stick with SR.var(...) ] Thanks for the tip, and thanks for answering so fast. -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
