Hello, I think it will be hard to achieve consistency on this matter. Unless of course somebody wants to spent the next few years doing that. Any volunteer ?
(0) I think we should allow "n*" and "n_*" and "number_of_*" only. I have a preference for "n_*". (1) My current proposal is to use "n_*" everywhere in geometry/ This is a small thing, and ready for review. (2) one could also easily get rid of all "num_*" as there are not so many. This is just annoying for graphs, (3) concerning alias versus deprecation, I would prefer to deprecate. But we can also keep the aliases and let our heirs do the deprecation. Frédéric Le jeudi 25 septembre 2025 à 03:05:30 UTC+2, Kwankyu Lee a écrit : > I regard > > "num_xxx", "n_xxx" and "nxxx" > > as different abbreviations of "number_of_xxx". So to abbreviate "number", > we are using "num" and "n". I think we should choose just one. I prefer "n" > (and hate "num"). > > Hence in my opinion, we should keep > > (1) "number_of_" like in "number_of_facets" > (2) "n_" like in "n_facets" > (3) "n" like in "ngens" > > and use (3) for names that occur very frequently. > > Kwankyu > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/cd6ad838-9a13-4c91-8123-c0ac1979684bn%40googlegroups.com.
