On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 at 1:16:53 PM UTC-8, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > On 2017-02-28 20:46, Johan S. H. Rosenkilde wrote: > > In that case, it > > could be seen as an implementation detail that objects have the _pari > > method, and private would be apt. > > Yes, it's an "implementation detail" but it's not "private". > > I would say it's a public implementation detail: something that users > shouldn't need to know but something that package developers should know > and can rely on. A private name like "_pari" would imply that we can > remove/change it at will, which is not applicable in this case. > > I think this is exactly like Python's special methods such as __init__: > as a user, you would normally not call these but they are very important > when developing a class. >
What about _latex_? Would you plan to change that, too? Sage objects and elements have lots of single-underscore methods, like _repr_, _mul_, etc. The use of _pari_ could be seen as in line with all of these, so I'm not sure why that choice has been rejected so quickly. -- John -- 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
