On Feb 10, 7:16 am, Jason Grout <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote:
> mabshoff wrote:
<SNIP>
> > Well, there are enough people around that if you remove right_kernel()
> > or whatever will end up with broken code. Having it deprecated for a
> > year or two seems to have zero cost to me.
>
> While this thread has gone off into deep waters, on this specific issue,
> I don't see a problem with having both right_kernel and kernel_right, as
> it is just an alias (or, given the problems that Nick Alexander points
> out with aliases and subclassing, maybe a function which immediately
> calls another function).
Yep.
> That said, if we'd like to eventually reduce namespace clutter (e.g.,
> 1-2 years), then I don't see the harm in doing what another person
> suggested: remove kernel_right from the tab-completion list. That will
> hide it so that (most) people won't write code using it, which cuts down
> on the number of breakages in several years.
Yes, I thought this was a particularly clever solution. Let's hope it
isn't too much work to implement this.
> For what it's worth, the namespace clutter I was really thinking of
> addressing was *future* clutter, not necessarily removing existing aliases.
:)
> Anyways, back to the regularly scheduled rants... :)
Well, this thread was/is a lot more fun all the sudden, but I think we
won't be seeing too many rants from me any more on this topic today
since I have to fix about 10 issues for 3.3.rc0 :)
> Jason
Cheers,
Michael
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sage-devel-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://www.sagemath.org
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
