On 15/03/17 12:42, Erik Bray wrote:
I don't have a strong feeling about it, but +0.5. I don't see
anything wrong with _pari_, and keeping with a _<name>_ (call it
"sunder" instead of "dunder") convention if it's already in use is the
least work.
FWIW, I find that having a consistent convention for special Sage
functions [1] is a good thing. In some cases (e.g. _repr_, _add_) the
names were chosen according to the dunder name in Python, so those
methods probably should not change.
Regards,
TB
[1]
http://doc.sagemath.org/html/en/developer/coding_in_python.html#special-sage-functions
--
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.
