Hi,
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 06:08:46AM -0700, smichr wrote:
> Would it make sense to unify Function, Wild and Symbol creation so one
> could do
>
> var('f:3', function=1) to get f0, f1, f2 functions, etc...? If there
> were a short keyword(sy?) for injecting or not inject the results then
> this could merge var and symbols, too.
>
> var('x:z', sy=1) => symbols('x:z')
>
In new symbols()/var() you have 'cls' keyword argument, so you can do:
In [1]: symbols('f:3', cls=Function)
Out[1]: (f0, f1, f2)
In [2]: map(type, _)
Out[2]: [<class 'sympy.core.function.FunctionClass'>, ... ]
In [3]: symbols('w:3', cls=Wild)
Out[3]: (w₀, w₁, w₂)
In [4]: map(type, _)
Out[4]: [<class 'sympy.core.symbol.Wild'>, ... ]
In [5]: var('f:3', cls=Function)
Out[5]: (f0, f1, f2)
In [6]: map(type, _)
Out[6]: [<class 'sympy.core.function.FunctionClass'>, ... ]
In [7]: var('w:3', cls=Wild)
Out[7]: (w₀, w₁, w₂)
In [8]: map(type, _)
Out[8]: [<class 'sympy.core.symbol.Wild'>, ... ]
(assuming that cls has certain properties).
When unifying symbols() and var(), I though about adding a keyword
argument to symbols(), say 'inject', which when set to True would
do var()'s job. This way var() would become just a simple wrapper.
However, as we disallow using var() in the library code, then it is
clearer, in my opinion, to have a separate function for the task,
than an argument to a function.
> --
> 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.
>
--
Mateusz
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
