Very nice explanation. I love the factorize(Cholesky, ...) way of doing it. It's nice to use types to convey precision on what you want to do.
On Sunday, April 26, 2015 at 8:10:09 PM UTC+2, Jameson wrote: > > Part of the push to use names without underscores is to encourage users to > choose names that are actually just a single word (or at most two, like the > is••• methods). If you feel the method needs to have a name of > does_this_and_that, it's often true that either you could have made two > methods (this and that), or eliminated one of the descriptors by utilizing > multiple dispatch (see the recent change from parse_•••(x) to parse(•••,x) > for example >
