[tlaplus] Why vars is defined as tuples instead of set

[Chris Ortiz <zitroomega@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi tlaplus group,

I am just curious with the convention why vars is defined as tuples of variables for UNCHANGED, <<A>>_vars, [A]_vars, [][Next]_vars, WF_vars and SF_vars. My understanding is that tuples preserved ordering of elements. Maybe I am still confused or still having a hang over with Programming Language, but I like to understand why tuple is the selected convention for such variables for those semantics, instead of set. Sometimes it confused me to make sure I follow the ordering from how I defined them in vars up to the way I removed variables in my UNCHANGED _expression_.

Thanks,

Zitro

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tlaplus" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tlaplus+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tlaplus/8c448736-b5e8-4855-a094-3c80ad617a94n%40googlegroups.com.