#18109: Restructure IntegerListLex code
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: vdelecroix | Owner:
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-6.6
Component: combinatorics | Resolution:
Keywords: | Merged in:
Authors: Jeroen Demeyer | Reviewers:
Report Upstream: N/A | Work issues:
Branch: | Commit:
u/jdemeyer/ticket/18109 | 434a15236a27b2d6aef0ab95877aa396e86b1cf8
Dependencies: #18181, #18184 | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by nthiery):
Replying to [comment:66 jdemeyer]:
> Well, I actually prefer `IntegerListsImpl_invlex` over
`IntegerListsLexImpl`.
>
> I ''intentionally'' do not want `IntegerListsImpl_invlex` to be
associated too much with `IntegerListsLex`: people should not think that
there must be a 1-to-1 correspondence between `IntegerLists` classes and
`IntegerListsImpl` classes.
I see your point. Still I find useful to give the reader a hint that,
in this case, there is such a correspondence. When reading the code,
I had to dig around to make sure I was getting it right.
So I'd rather have a consistent naming scheme, and a note to the
developers, in the overview documentation of the module, that there
need not be in general such a 1-to-1 correspondence.
Cheers,
Nicolas
PS: fun error message :-)
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/18109#comment:70>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" 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 http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
