Le mercredi 13 juin 2012 à 02:06 -0700, Aleksandar Makelov a écrit : > Hi again, > > Based on the discussion I can suggest the following concrete changes: > - for now, use both Perm and Permutation as names for the class > defining a permutation > - similarly, use both PermGroup and PermutationGroup as names for the > class defining a permutation group
"Perm" is really a bad name that doesn't suggest anything to do with permutations. "PermGroup" is less bad but isn't that much shorter either. In any case, having more than one way to do it is bad, as a general principle, so sympy code should only use the explicit alternatives. > - remove the checks from Perm, and make a *function* PermS (the name > is deliberately chosen to be as close as Perm) that performs the > checks and then constructs a permutation object using Perm (the name > comes from Permutation Safe). Urgh, no! The design is OK, though not terribly consistent with the rest of sympy where users need to directly call class constructors all the time, but the naming seems designed to maximise user confusion. Casual users shouldn't need to know about the concept of permutation "safeness", nor have to remember a cryptic abbreviation for it, and functions names (conventionally lowercase) shouldn't make them look like classes. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en.
