I can't see a reason why solve should no accept any iterable.
Vinzent
On May 22, 6:49 pm, Luke wrote:
> Chris,
> You're right, who knows when that functionality may be useful. And
> it isn't a problem to deal with all three easily, so we should leave
> it in there.
> ~Luke
>
> On May 22, 3:
Chris,
You're right, who knows when that functionality may be useful. And
it isn't a problem to deal with all three easily, so we should leave
it in there.
~Luke
On May 22, 3:32 am, smichr wrote:
> On May 22, 4:23 am, Luke wrote:> Does anybody use
> solve() by passing the function and/or th
On May 22, 4:23 am, Luke wrote:
> Does anybody use solve() by passing the function and/or the symbol
> arguments as a set, rather than a list or a tuple?
>
> I can't see a reason why using it with a set would be beneficial, and
> without support for sets, there are some aspects of solve that wo
