I would argue that again depends highly on the specific usecase (as we discussed the other day), and is structurally a very similar solution (i.e. a dictionary is also an object in Python world, meant for structuring data). I agree that it should be considered a “hack” to have to wrap a dict in a list/tuple for it to output as an actual dict. But it does, and at least means that one can inspect what it is in the DAG, as opposed to an arbitrary class instance:
But I suppose this all points to slightly more fundamental/conceptual dataflow issues when combining declarative and imperative programming paradigms like this. Which again perhaps aren’t necessarily that large, if one for instance uses GH as essentially a DAG/GUI/IDE for developing almost purely GHPython pipelines (edit: and thus can step outside of the standard DataTree/GH types dataflow/logic). All that said, the empty class solution is really rather elegant I find 