Remove a seemingly redundant line

[devmotion]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Benchmark Results

	master	17e5955...	master/17e59557283c43...
overhead/acrule/a+2	0.764 ± 0.029 μs	0.755 ± 0.018 μs	1.01
overhead/acrule/a+2+b	0.74 ± 0.024 μs	0.727 ± 0.015 μs	1.02
overhead/acrule/a+b	0.254 ± 0.013 μs	0.255 ± 0.0068 μs	0.999
overhead/acrule/noop:Int	25 ± 0.059 ns	26.2 ± 0.91 ns	0.953
overhead/acrule/noop:Sym	0.0364 ± 0.0053 μs	0.0436 ± 0.005 μs	0.835
overhead/rule/noop:Int	0.0441 ± 0.00048 μs	0.0443 ± 0.001 μs	0.997
overhead/rule/noop:Sym	0.0562 ± 0.0023 μs	0.054 ± 0.0029 μs	1.04
overhead/rule/noop:Term	0.0539 ± 0.0027 μs	0.0543 ± 0.0032 μs	0.992
overhead/ruleset/noop:Int	0.127 ± 0.0035 μs	0.135 ± 0.005 μs	0.943
overhead/ruleset/noop:Sym	0.148 ± 0.0039 μs	0.151 ± 0.0076 μs	0.978
overhead/ruleset/noop:Term	3.14 ± 0.11 μs	3.25 ± 0.19 μs	0.963
overhead/simplify/noop:Int	0.142 ± 0.0038 μs	0.143 ± 0.0022 μs	0.994
overhead/simplify/noop:Sym	0.16 ± 0.0044 μs	0.161 ± 0.0039 μs	0.992
overhead/simplify/noop:Term	0.0383 ± 0.0021 ms	0.0353 ± 0.0015 ms	1.08
overhead/simplify/randterm (+, *):serial	0.0875 ± 0.0011 s	0.0845 ± 0.00079 s	1.04
overhead/simplify/randterm (+, *):thread	0.0527 ± 0.028 s	0.0505 ± 0.03 s	1.04
overhead/simplify/randterm (/, *):serial	0.216 ± 0.0056 ms	0.21 ± 0.0057 ms	1.03
overhead/simplify/randterm (/, *):thread	0.244 ± 0.0071 ms	0.239 ± 0.0069 ms	1.02
overhead/substitute/a	0.0605 ± 0.0015 ms	0.0585 ± 0.0016 ms	1.03
overhead/substitute/a,b	0.0529 ± 0.0015 ms	0.052 ± 0.0015 ms	1.02
overhead/substitute/a,b,c	17.8 ± 0.68 μs	18.2 ± 0.75 μs	0.98
polyform/easy_iszero	29.1 ± 1.8 μs	29.5 ± 2 μs	0.985
polyform/isone	2.79 ± 0.01 ns	2.79 ± 0.01 ns	1
polyform/iszero	1.1 ± 0.027 ms	1.11 ± 0.03 ms	0.992
polyform/simplify_fractions	1.6 ± 0.033 ms	1.62 ± 0.038 ms	0.985
time_to_load	2.11 ± 0.0089 s	2.1 ± 0.008 s	1

Benchmark Plots

A plot of the benchmark results have been uploaded as an artifact to the workflow run for this PR.
Go to "Actions"->"Benchmark a pull request"->[the most recent run]->"Artifacts" (at the bottom).

[bowenszhu]

This pull request appears to be a duplicate of #600. Closing this one to avoid redundancy.

[devmotion]

Ah, I hadn't seen #600. It's not exactly a duplicate though - on purpose I removed the line n, t = _name_type(..) since _name_type sometimes returns a named tuple with more than two elements, so accessing the return values by name seemed clearer.

[bowenszhu]

Reasonable. Merging this.