> > Sorry for being a pain, but doesn't LinAlg be LinearAlgebra? What's the > point of issuing naming convention if it is not even respected by the main > developers?
I'm glad you are apologizing, because I find the way you are expressing yourself is borderline insulting to the hard work of others (whose work you stand to benefit from, as it seems like you are just being to write Julia code going by your ODE thread). Its not that the style guide "isn't respected by the main developers", its that some things happened organically, we're all human, we all have biases, that the style guide wasn't formalized from the start, and that perfect is the enemy of good. Many people in this thread could do with taking a more charitable position. I see some constructive suggestions, that seem pretty darn sensible. Even better would be pull requests - anything than simply tearing down what exists. There is no shortage of people to offer opinions, but there is always a lack of people willing to actually do something about it - whether its improving documentation like the style guide, or implementing changes. On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 4:44:40 PM UTC-4, François Fayard wrote: > > Sorry for being a pain, but doesn't LinAlg be LinearAlgebra? What's the > point of issuing naming convention if it is not even respected by the main > developers? > > Besides, I really find that Julia underuses multiple dispatch. It's a big > selling point of the language and it's not even used that much in the > standard library! Mathematica has a kind of multiple dispatch and it's what > makes the language so consistent. If people mimic Matlab, multiple dispatch > will be underused.
