>it is however might sound convincing that you basically pollute the codebase with > stuff that only you and your collaborators know about.
This is not quite right, see https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sage-combinat-devel/a7wq0ksV2fY/discussion the initial discussion on this topic on sage-combinat-devel (and so far, we only decorated methods the combinat folder, except for the two methods for graphs which we already discuss to remove again. So the combinat people seem to be happy with the decorator and its usage, including its value for them as well. > the reason is as stated above, it seems - polluting the codebase with strange stuff... I don't find a way to tell if a method is a map between combinatorial collections very strange. > Did you? The first time combinatorial_map features in the subject line > of sage-devel is this very thread. Just googling combinatorial_map > doesn't seem to produce meaningful hits either. See the link above, we moved from the initial idea of a combinatorial_statistic decorator. > Well, again, are you sure it's OK to liberally tag library code for your own > projects? Do you make marks on pages of library books just because it is > convenient for you? I do agree that it would be not very nice to do so if I were doing it silently and/or everywhere. But as said above, we only did it in the combinat part after multiple on- and offline discussions with many of the Sage-Combinat developers. -- 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 sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
