I guess this is fine. It may not be the most useful though since lowering depends on context, and if it's no context then people might want simplified_expr instead.

Codecov Report

Merging #191 into master will decrease coverage by 0.18%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #191      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.75%   92.56%   -0.19%     
==========================================
  Files          14       14              
  Lines         469      471       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits          435      436       +1     
- Misses         34       35       +1

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 870f80f...3bf6b6c. Read the comment docs.

aside from changing variables like y(t) to y, this is a subset. I didn't know simplify_expr existed. simplify_expr is essentially what i was going for. Looking at it, this one doesn't handle constants or differentials correctly. When would it be useful to have y(t) in the expression instead of y though?eval(:(y(t)))#error

nevermind just saw you already explained this in your comment 🥇

When would it be useful to have y(t) in the expression instead of y though?eval(:(y(t)))#error

When it's actually a function, for example time-varying covariate, or the solution to a differential equation.

So should this just be replaced with simplify_expr? That might make it easier for most use cases.

Yes simplify_expr is probably better

Thanks!