<p>Thanks for the tip-off! That does make sense. Is this documented anywhere, as if so I didn't find it? Although no doubt I would have found out eventually by experience.</p>
<p>Cheers,<br>
David</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 15 May 2012 05:29, "Luc Bourhis" <<a href="mailto:luc_j_bourhis@mac.com">luc_j_bourhis@mac.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">Hi David,<br><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><span style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:'Lucida Sans';font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:-webkit-auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium">Tuple as a common type for all sequence-type objects makes sense in Python</span></blockquote>
<br></div><div>Only for those sequences whose size is fixed at compile-time, i.e. af::tiny, af::small and any type derived from them, which at the moment is limited to scitbx::vec3 and scitbx::vec2 from the top of my head. If you return an array with a dynamic size, i.e. af::shared or af::versa, then it will be converted to scitbx.array_family.shared and scitbx.array_family.flex respectively.</div>
<div><br></div><div>HtH,</div><div><br></div><div>Luc</div><div><br></div><br></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
cctbxbb mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cctbxbb@phenix-online.org">cctbxbb@phenix-online.org</a><br>
<a href="http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb" target="_blank">http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>