Opened 10 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
#12834 closed enhancement (fixed)
Modify subs so that it can accept multiple equations just like subs_expr
Reported by:  JoalHeagney  Owned by:  AlexGhitza 

Priority:  minor  Milestone:  sage6.8 
Component:  symbolics  Keywords:  subs algebra solving 
Cc:  kcrisman  Merged in:  
Authors:  Michael Orlitzky, Vincent Delecroix  Reviewers:  Vincent Delecroix, Michael Orlitzky 
Report Upstream:  N/A  Work issues:  
Branch:  cb5347e (Commits, GitHub, GitLab)  Commit:  cb5347e9980347a8ce29209e00d586e4d41007b0 
Dependencies:  Stopgaps: 
Description (last modified by )
In this ticket:
 we make
expr.substitute(in_dict, **kwds)
asexpr.substitute(*args, **kwds)
and make it accepts any kind of arguments (symbolic equalities, dictionnaries or lists of them)  we deprecate
subs_expr
as a duplicate ofsubs
This came up as a method of passing solutions from solve back into symbolic equations:
f(x,y) = (1x)^2 + 100*(y  x^2)^2 solution = solve([f.diff(ar) for ar in f.args()],f.args())[0] Gives me a list of solutions as: [x=1;y=1] Is there any way to programatically substitute this list of equalities back into f?
The solution provided by Michael Orlitzky was
f(x,y).subs_expr(*solution)
Anycase, as noted by Michael, it would be nice if subs had the same behaviour:
Passing it one equation does work, sage: f.subs(x == 1) y + z + 1 But more than one doesn't, sage: f.subs(x == 1, y == 2) ... TypeError: substitute() takes at most 1 positional argument (2 given) I guess all that's missing is the ability to pass it multiple equations, like `subs_expr`. It would probably be easy to add that ability to `subs` if you want to create a ticket for something.
With the branch applied we have:
sage: f(x,y) = (1x)^2 + 100*(y  x^2)^2 sage: solution = solve([f.diff(ar) for ar in f.args()],f.args()) sage: solution [[x == 1, y == 1]] sage: f.subs(solution[0]) (x, y) > 0
Attachments (2)
Change History (47)
comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by
comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by
I would argue that we accept the weird behaviour in the cases above, but document it.
Most users are (hopefully) unlikely to use such mixed arguments, and trying to predict the desired behaviour of those that do will probably result in the wrong answer.
Changed 10 years ago by
Make Expression.subs() accept lists, throw errors on subs conflicts, and doc cleanup.
comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by
 Status changed from new to needs_review
Some Cython limitations made this more of an event than it had to be, but the patch implements the requested feature and Nils' suggestions from comment 1.
When you pass subs()
a list, it's processed recursively, which has the nice side effect of allowing you to call solve()
and pass the result to subs()
without caring about the form of the return value.
The new subs()
throws an error on conflicting substitutions... nobody reads the documentation unless they have to so I think it's better to alert the user that he's likely making a mistake.
comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by
 Cc kcrisman added
comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by
Well I tried the patch out on my example and it seems to work well.
comment:6 Changed 9 years ago by
Patch needs to be rediffed for current Sage...
Changed 9 years ago by
comment:8 Changed 9 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage5.11 to sage5.12
comment:9 Changed 8 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.1 to sage6.2
comment:10 Changed 8 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.2 to sage6.3
comment:11 Changed 8 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.3 to sage6.4
comment:12 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch set to public/12384
 Commit set to 045eebfd67858405c6665acfa1eea5f22ca7fc6f
comment:13 Changed 7 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
comment:14 Changed 7 years ago by
As it happens, I had started doing my own version of something similar a while ago at a time where I had no internet access and hence without seeing this ticket. The implementation here is probably better, but I pushed mine to u/mmezzarobba/subs
in case somebody wants to see if there is anything to be salvaged. (I may doit myself in a few days/weeks, but I have no time right now.)
comment:15 followup: ↓ 20 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to needs_info
Hi Marc,
There is some difference of designs.
 in your version, the rightmost occurrence of a substitution takes precedence, while in Michael's one an error is raised
 you deprecate
subs_expr
andsubstitute_expression
(I think this is good)  is this a bug or a feature?
sage: var('x,y,t') sage: A = cos(x) + sin(y) + x^2 + y^2 + t sage: A.subs({x^2 + y^2: t}) x^2 + y^2 + t + cos(x) + sin(y) sage: A.subs({cos(x) + x^2 + sin(y) + t + + y^2: 1}) 1
 I like very much the presence of examples involving maple and mathematica
Vincent
comment:16 followup: ↓ 18 Changed 7 years ago by
@Vincent: Most of your changes look fine to me, thanks for picking this up again. I have a few comments:
 When making multiple duplicate substitutions, all of the errors are no longer reported. This used to work like,
sage: d1 = {'a': 1, 'b': 2} sage: d2 = {'b': 1, 'a': 2} sage: _subs_safe_merge(d1, d2) ValueError: Duplicate substitutions given: a, b
showing that both a
and b
had duplicate substitituons. Now it only shows the error for a
:
ValueError: duplicate substitutions a>1 and a>2
The test "We should report all such conflicts..." was intended to show that =)
 I like the fact that you show the whole substitution in the error, e.g.
ValueError: duplicate substitutions a>b and a>c
, but I think the arrow notation is confusing. I can't tell at a glance whethera
orb
is the variable. In some programming languages, the arrow is used to mean "take the value ofa
and put that intob
." In other contexts, you could think of it as "takea
and make it becomeb
", which is actually the reverse substitution.
Above, you can deduce which is which (if you think for a minute), but you can also wind up withValueError: duplicate substitutions x>y and x>y
where it's totally ambiguous.
Is there some other notation that people generally agree on? Maybe the colonequals, which defines the thing on the left to be equal to the thing on the right? For example,x := 3
would mean thatx
is being defined to be3
; i.e.3
is substituted forx
. It's a slight abuse of notation, but we can think of:=
as "make the thing on the left equal the thing on the right from now on." That's basically what a substitution is.
 My "And finally, a list containing one of everything" test was meant to show that we can handle all three types (symbolic equality, a dict, and another list) at the same time. You noticed that I forgot tuples (thanks!), but can we do them all at the same time? For example,
sage: w, x, y, z = SR.var('w, x, y, z') sage: _subs_make_dict([w == 1, {x: 1}, [y == 1], (z == 1,)]) {w: 1, y: 1, x: 1, z: 1}
 I agree that we can deprecate the other substitution methods
subs_expr
andsubstitute_expression
.
That's it, thanks again for taking the time to work on this.
comment:17 Changed 7 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
 Reviewers set to Vincent Delecroix, Michael Orlitzky
comment:18 in reply to: ↑ 16 ; followup: ↓ 21 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch changed from public/12384 to public/12834
 Commit changed from 045eebfd67858405c6665acfa1eea5f22ca7fc6f to 02ca48403e7fa696c368250084d8d9eebd0de14f
Replying to mjo:
@Vincent: Most of your changes look fine to me, thanks for picking this up again. I have a few comments:
 When making multiple duplicate substitutions, all of the errors are no longer reported. This used to work like,
This is not really doable and makes no sense if there are a lot of arguments like
sage: expr.subs((a == b), [a == c, x == 3], {a: 4})
The dictionary of substitutions is constructed sequentially.
I just removed the problematic doctest. If you prefer to report all collisions, please tell me why...
 I like the fact that you show the whole substitution in the error, e.g.
ValueError: duplicate substitutions a>b and a>c
, but I think the arrow notation is confusing.
You are perfectly right. This is now a whole sentence
duplicate substitution for a, got values 1 and 2
 My "And finally, a list containing one of everything" test was meant to show that we can handle all three types (symbolic equality, a dict, and another list) at the same time. You noticed that I forgot tuples (thanks!), but can we do them all at the same time? For example,
There is a now a doctest for that.
 I agree that we can deprecate the other substitution methods
subs_expr
andsubstitute_expression
.
Done.
Vincent
New commits:
0272d29  Trac 12834: merge sage6.7.beta4

b6e196d  Trac 12834: remove trailing whitespaces

a09094a  Trac 12834: review

02ca484  Trac 12834: fix the french book that is using subs_expr

comment:19 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_info to needs_review
comment:20 in reply to: ↑ 15 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
 is this a bug or a feature?
sage: var('x,y,t') sage: A = cos(x) + sin(y) + x^2 + y^2 + t sage: A.subs({x^2 + y^2: t}) x^2 + y^2 + t + cos(x) + sin(y) sage: A.subs({cos(x) + x^2 + sin(y) + t + + y^2: 1}) 1
I opened #18396 for that purpose.
comment:21 in reply to: ↑ 18 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
I just removed the problematic doctest. If you prefer to report all collisions, please tell me why...
It can be annoying to have to retry the call to subs()
over and over again getting a different error every time. But it's not a big deal to me.
I made a few more changes noted in the commit messages.. everything seems OK otherwise, pending a ptestlong. I also rebased on top of the develop branch to get a clean commit history.
comment:22 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch changed from public/12834 to u/mjo/ticket/12834
 Commit changed from 02ca48403e7fa696c368250084d8d9eebd0de14f to 24b98a061c140e9f76b171eb3dd1be0fa44d36b8
New commits:
d7eb66e  Trac #12834: Allow Expression.subs() to take a list similarly to Expression.subs_expr().

3cf4498  Trac #12384: simplification and cleanup

27bbade  Trac 12834: remove trailing whitespaces

9721512  Trac 12834: review

bb5de82  Trac 12834: fix the french book that is using subs_expr

05492f4  Trac #12834: Avoid iterating over the substitution dict twice.

0d34382  Trac #12834: Ensure consistent failures by sorting duplicate substitutions.

9030aba  Trac #12834: Test equality of dictionaries to avoid sorting bugs.

6b0676c  Trac #12834: Mention the tuple representation in _subs_make_dict's docstring.

24b98a0  Trac #12834: Manually wordwrap some lines.

comment:23 followup: ↓ 26 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
Hello,
I do not agree with your 05492f4
and 0d34382
. First of all, if something is wrong, then it is not a big deal to go through the dictionaries again. Your version is way much too complicated. Please do something along
dup = [k for k in d2 if k in d1] if dup: k = min(dup) msg = "duplicate substitution for {}, got values {} and {}" raise ValueError(msg.format(k, d1[k], d2[k]))
And you can remark that I iterated over d2
and this was intentional. The dictionary d1
is intended to be large compared to d2
(think about expr.subs(u == 18, v == 15, w == 19, x == 1, y == 2, z == 3)
). In your commit you reversed that. And you should know that to get the minimum of a list you do not need to sort it ;) Was the call to sorted
intentional compared to min
?
If you have access to Maple/Mathematica
I would be curious to know what they do for
sage: (x + x^2 + x^4).subs(x + x^2 == 2)
The other changes are fine to me.
Vincent
comment:24 Changed 7 years ago by
 Component changed from algebra to symbolics
comment:25 Changed 7 years ago by
I just asked some collegues and maple does
>> subs(x = t, x + x^2 + x^3) 3 2 t + t + t >> subs(x^2 = t, x + x^2 + x^3) 3 x + t + x >> subs(x + x^3 = t, x + x^2 + x^3) 3 2 x + x + x >> subs(x + x^2 = t, x + x^2 + x^3) 3 2 x + x + x >> subs(x + x^2 + x^3 = t, x + x^2 + x^3) t
It would be cool to have these doctests. I found these examples simpler than what we currently have.
comment:26 in reply to: ↑ 23 ; followup: ↓ 28 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
Hello,
I do not agree with your
05492f4
and0d34382
. First of all, if something is wrong, then it is not a big deal to go through the dictionaries again. Your version is way much too complicated. Please do something alongdup = [k for k in d2 if k in d1] if dup: k = min(dup) msg = "duplicate substitution for {}, got values {} and {}" raise ValueError(msg.format(k, d1[k], d2[k]))And you can remark that I iterated over
d2
and this was intentional. The dictionaryd1
is intended to be large compared tod2
(think aboutexpr.subs(u == 18, v == 15, w == 19, x == 1, y == 2, z == 3)
). In your commit you reversed that. And you should know that to get the minimum of a list you do not need to sort it ;) Was the call tosorted
intentional compared tomin
?
I guess I wasn't very clear in my commit message =)
The original code was,
if any(k in d1 for k in d2): k = (k for k in d1 if k in d2).next() raise ValueError...
The first any(k in d1 for k in d2)
is probably O(m*n), since it (potentially) has to look through all of both dictionaries to see if there are any duplicates. Then,
k = (k for k in d1 if k in d2).next()
also looks through both dictionaries, essentially to do the same thing: to see if there are any duplicates, but this time we write down the first duplicate key.
Since we're going to find the first duplicate key anyway, we don't need to do the first any
check. If the dupe is toward the end of the list, the any
less version could be a lot faster. Once the any
check is gone, my version isn't much different than yours. But since I've removed the any
check, I no longer know that next()
is safe in
k = (k for k in d1 if k in d2).next()
because it could throw a StopIteration
exception. Instead of catching the exception, I chose to use a "for ... in" loop iteration:
for k in (k for k in d1 if k in d2)
That achieves the same thing without having to check whether or not there were any dupes. I tested it with some big dictionaries and it is a little faster. But since I can't force a dupe to be "at the end" of a dictionary, I can't check the worstcase.
In any case, I'm going to push another version that should be faster and simpler than both =)
comment:27 Changed 7 years ago by
 Commit changed from 24b98a061c140e9f76b171eb3dd1be0fa44d36b8 to e195b36b27caeeebcb6f2e69f90b048a9e5b9d51
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
e195b36  Trac #12834: Simplify duplicate detection in _dict_update_check_duplicate.

comment:28 in reply to: ↑ 26 ; followup: ↓ 33 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to mjo:
Replying to vdelecroix:
Hello,
I do not agree with your
05492f4
and0d34382
. First of all, if something is wrong, then it is not a big deal to go through the dictionaries again. Your version is way much too complicated. Please do something alongdup = [k for k in d2 if k in d1] if dup: k = min(dup) msg = "duplicate substitution for {}, got values {} and {}" raise ValueError(msg.format(k, d1[k], d2[k]))And you can remark that I iterated over
d2
and this was intentional. The dictionaryd1
is intended to be large compared tod2
(think aboutexpr.subs(u == 18, v == 15, w == 19, x == 1, y == 2, z == 3)
). In your commit you reversed that. And you should know that to get the minimum of a list you do not need to sort it ;) Was the call tosorted
intentional compared tomin
?I guess I wasn't very clear in my commit message =)
The original code was,
if any(k in d1 for k in d2): k = (k for k in d1 if k in d2).next() raise ValueError...The first
any(k in d1 for k in d2)
is probably O(m*n), since it (potentially) has to look through all of both dictionaries to see if there are any duplicates. Then,
You are wrong. A dictionary is a hash table not a list. Assuming that there is no collision this is a O(m) where m=size(d2).
comment:29 followup: ↓ 32 Changed 7 years ago by
And looking at your last commit k2 in d1.keys()
is O(n) in any case whereas k2 in d1
is a lookup in a hash table.
comment:30 Changed 7 years ago by
And if you want to be convinced
sage: l = range(1000) sage: timeit("1 in l", number=2000) 2000 loops, best of 3: 26.1 µs per loop sage: d = dict.fromkeys(range(1000)) sage: timeit("1 in d", number=2000) 2000 loops, best of 3: 460 ns per loop
comment:31 Changed 7 years ago by
In other words, just do
for k in sorted(d2, key=str): if k in d1: ...
comment:32 in reply to: ↑ 29 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
And looking at your last commit
k2 in d1.keys()
is O(n) in any case whereask2 in d1
is a lookup in a hash table.
You are definitely right about this, I'll fix it.
comment:33 in reply to: ↑ 28 ; followup: ↓ 35 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
The first
any(k in d1 for k in d2)
is probably O(m*n), since it (potentially) has to look through all of both dictionaries to see if there are any duplicates. Then,You are wrong. A dictionary is a hash table not a list. Assuming that there is no collision this is a O(m) where m=size(d2).
Right, but doesn't this
k in d1 for k in d2
do the d1[k]
lookup (which is O(n)) m times, once for each key in d2
?
comment:34 Changed 7 years ago by
 Commit changed from e195b36b27caeeebcb6f2e69f90b048a9e5b9d51 to 33fd4491e0014487e18bdc1007d21751d74f8619
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
33fd449  Trac #12834: Fix hash lookup in _dict_update_check_duplicate.

comment:35 in reply to: ↑ 33 ; followup: ↓ 37 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to mjo:
Replying to vdelecroix:
The first
any(k in d1 for k in d2)
is probably O(m*n), since it (potentially) has to look through all of both dictionaries to see if there are any duplicates. Then,You are wrong. A dictionary is a hash table not a list. Assuming that there is no collision this is a O(m) where m=size(d2).
Right, but doesn't this
k in d1 for k in d2do the
d1[k]
lookup (which is O(n)) m times, once for each key ind2
?
The lookup is O(1). And once for each key in d2 gives O(m). There is no for loop on d1, isn't it?
comment:36 Changed 7 years ago by
Looks good to me. Can I add a commit to show a more relevant example about comparisons of maple/mathematica with respect to substitution?
comment:37 in reply to: ↑ 35 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to vdelecroix:
The lookup is O(1). And once for each key in d2 gives O(m). There is no for loop on d1, isn't it?
Ah, I was using the worstcase O(n) instead of the average O(1).
Looks good to me. Can I add a commit to show a more relevant example about comparisons of maple/mathematica with respect to substitution?
Sure.
comment:38 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch changed from u/mjo/ticket/12834 to u/vdelecroix/12834
 Commit changed from 33fd4491e0014487e18bdc1007d21751d74f8619 to a56c96969fd5baa0b4fbe53d9f60cbcd89fd8e31
 Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
Sorry for the delay!
I added a more complete example comparing maxima/maple/mathematica. Tested with the last version of maple but I do not have access to Mathematica. So it lacks some test.
I think I am done. So I let you review my last commit.
note: it is based on 6.7.rc0
Vincent
Last 10 new commits:
e8b9c05  Trac 12834: review

81ebcdc  Trac 12834: fix the french book that is using subs_expr

f7a233b  Trac #12834: Avoid iterating over the substitution dict twice.

322981e  Trac #12834: Ensure consistent failures by sorting duplicate substitutions.

003fa00  Trac #12834: Test equality of dictionaries to avoid sorting bugs.

5460cfc  Trac #12834: Mention the tuple representation in _subs_make_dict's docstring.

e617094  Trac #12834: Manually wordwrap some lines.

37aa1f8  Trac #12834: Simplify duplicate detection in _dict_update_check_duplicate.

d2d58a3  Trac #12834: Fix hash lookup in _dict_update_check_duplicate.

a56c969  Trac 12834: more details substitution examples

comment:39 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch changed from u/vdelecroix/12834 to u/mjo/ticket/12834
 Commit changed from a56c96969fd5baa0b4fbe53d9f60cbcd89fd8e31 to 66b961cffbf0e6ba451c36a1b792219a8d63b93f
I made some minor cosmetic fixes (typo fix and wordwrap). Other than that it looks good to me. As long as those optional tests work (I don't have maple/mathematica), you can mark it positive review.
Last 10 new commits:
81ebcdc  Trac 12834: fix the french book that is using subs_expr

f7a233b  Trac #12834: Avoid iterating over the substitution dict twice.

322981e  Trac #12834: Ensure consistent failures by sorting duplicate substitutions.

003fa00  Trac #12834: Test equality of dictionaries to avoid sorting bugs.

5460cfc  Trac #12834: Mention the tuple representation in _subs_make_dict's docstring.

e617094  Trac #12834: Manually wordwrap some lines.

37aa1f8  Trac #12834: Simplify duplicate detection in _dict_update_check_duplicate.

d2d58a3  Trac #12834: Fix hash lookup in _dict_update_check_duplicate.

a56c969  Trac 12834: more details substitution examples

66b961c  Trac #12834: Typo fix and manually wordwrap a few doctests.

comment:40 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to positive_review
Thanks for the last fixes!
comment:41 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from positive_review to needs_work
sage t long warnlong 26.6 src/sage/doctest/sources.py ********************************************************************** File "src/sage/doctest/sources.py", line 694, in sage.doctest.sources.FileDocTestSource._test_enough_doctests Failed example: for path, dirs, files in itertools.chain(os.walk('sage'), os.walk('doc')): # long time path = os.path.relpath(path) dirs.sort(); files.sort() for F in files: _, ext = os.path.splitext(F) if ext in ('.py', '.pyx', '.pxd', '.pxi', '.sage', '.spyx', '.rst'): filename = os.path.join(path, F) FDS = FileDocTestSource(filename, DocTestDefaults(long=True,optional=True)) FDS._test_enough_doctests(verbose=False) Expected: There are 7 tests in sage/combinat/dyck_word.py that are not being run There are 4 tests in sage/combinat/finite_state_machine.py that are not being run There are 6 tests in sage/combinat/interval_posets.py that are not being run There are 18 tests in sage/combinat/partition.py that are not being run There are 15 tests in sage/combinat/permutation.py that are not being run There are 14 tests in sage/combinat/skew_partition.py that are not being run There are 18 tests in sage/combinat/tableau.py that are not being run There are 8 tests in sage/combinat/crystals/tensor_product.py that are not being run There are 11 tests in sage/combinat/rigged_configurations/rigged_configurations.py that are not being run There are 15 tests in sage/combinat/root_system/cartan_type.py that are not being run There are 8 tests in sage/combinat/root_system/type_A.py that are not being run There are 8 tests in sage/combinat/root_system/type_G.py that are not being run There are 3 unexpected tests being run in sage/doctest/parsing.py There are 1 unexpected tests being run in sage/doctest/reporting.py There are 9 tests in sage/graphs/graph_plot.py that are not being run There are 3 tests in sage/rings/invariant_theory.py that are not being run Got: There are 7 tests in sage/combinat/dyck_word.py that are not being run There are 4 tests in sage/combinat/finite_state_machine.py that are not being run There are 6 tests in sage/combinat/interval_posets.py that are not being run There are 18 tests in sage/combinat/partition.py that are not being run There are 15 tests in sage/combinat/permutation.py that are not being run There are 14 tests in sage/combinat/skew_partition.py that are not being run There are 18 tests in sage/combinat/tableau.py that are not being run There are 8 tests in sage/combinat/crystals/tensor_product.py that are not being run There are 11 tests in sage/combinat/rigged_configurations/rigged_configurations.py that are not being run There are 15 tests in sage/combinat/root_system/cartan_type.py that are not being run There are 8 tests in sage/combinat/root_system/type_A.py that are not being run There are 8 tests in sage/combinat/root_system/type_G.py that are not being run There are 3 unexpected tests being run in sage/doctest/parsing.py There are 1 unexpected tests being run in sage/doctest/reporting.py There are 9 tests in sage/graphs/graph_plot.py that are not being run There are 3 tests in sage/rings/invariant_theory.py that are not being run There are 10 tests in sage/symbolic/expression.pyx that are not being run
comment:42 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch changed from u/mjo/ticket/12834 to u/vdelecroix/12834
 Commit changed from 66b961cffbf0e6ba451c36a1b792219a8d63b93f to cb5347e9980347a8ce29209e00d586e4d41007b0
 Status changed from needs_work to positive_review
My mistake. Sorry.
New commits:
cb5347e  Trac 12834: move doctests related to the deprecated subs_expr

comment:43 Changed 7 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.4 to sage6.8
comment:44 Changed 7 years ago by
This time all tests pass.
comment:45 Changed 7 years ago by
 Branch changed from u/vdelecroix/12834 to cb5347e9980347a8ce29209e00d586e4d41007b0
 Resolution set to fixed
 Status changed from positive_review to closed
subs_expr
is already just doing a bit of preprocessing and then callingsubs
, so if the interface ofsubs
is changed to accept a wider variety of input then subs_expr can simply be done away with. I'd sayNote that behaviour at the moment is a bit random: