#13282: Access to GRDB Fano polytopes
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
       Reporter:  sjg10           |         Owner:  mhampton
           Type:  enhancement     |        Status:  new     
       Priority:  major           |     Milestone:  sage-5.3
      Component:  geometry        |    Resolution:          
       Keywords:                  |   Work issues:          
Report Upstream:  N/A             |     Reviewers:          
        Authors:  Samuel Gonshaw  |     Merged in:          
   Dependencies:                  |      Stopgaps:          
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------

Comment (by novoselt):

 I personally find it a bit confusing to enumerate polytopes in all
 dimensions as a single sequence and for iterating though all of them it
 seems more natural to have functions that take only dimension and return
 the sequence of all polytopes of that dimension. If you really feel that
 your second one-argument form should work, I still prefer it to a bunch of
 functions with trailing dimensions.

 As for naming conventions:
  * Accessing stuff through module names or factories isn't much different
 from the point of view "need to know their names" to use them, factories
 actually tend to have shorter/more natural names.
  * `lattice_polytope.PolytopeSmoothFano` repeats "polytope" twice and
 looks strange.
  * I am not sure why do we have `lattice_polytope` imported in the global
 namespace at all. William has done it many years ago when I provided just
 the original module, not a patch. According to current situation, it does
 not seem to me that it should be imported itself - only some of its
 classes/functions directly.
  * My original name suggestion was not very thought through, it should be
 rather `Fano_polytopes_grdb` or just `polytopes_grdb` (or with `GRDB`) and
 imported in the global name space so that it appears in TAB completion for
 `Fano` or `polytope`, just as there is now `polytopes` database. This is
 more logical than `lattice_polytope` for those who don't know module
 hierarchy.

 Volker, what are your thoughts?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13282#comment:3>
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 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-trac?hl=en.

Reply via email to