On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 6:41 PM, mabshoff <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Feb 26, 3:39 pm, Craig Citro <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> I don't particularly like s.card(), because the abbreviation is too
>> >> opaque --
>>
>> > Ah, is it? Hmm, well, maybe. Short poll: who finds card opaque?
>>
>> I think it's pretty opaque. If I was looking for something like size
>> already, I might think card is short for cardinality ... but if I was
>> just looking through a list of methods, I don't think I'd guess that
>> one right off.
>
> Yes, let's not do "card" - we have tab completion for crying out loud
> and that allows us to use long and descriptive names unlike some other
> systems out there where I have a hard time wrapping my name around
> naming conventions. No need to name names :)
>
+1.
Especially in combinatorics "card" makes me think of "card games".
Note that any user can put in their init.sage:
def card(x, *args, **kwds):
return x.cardinality(x, *args, **kwds)
and have their own "card" shorthand for the card method when working
interactively.
For people writing library code, just spell it out.
-- William
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
