That was what I was feeling. That this was a legacy issue for lowercase
type "constructors". Thanks so much.
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 1:11:41 AM UTC-7, Mauro wrote:
>
> I think you should use the constructors if the user expects to construct
> a certain type, e.g. `Dict()`. Conversely if the user cares about the
> action then use a function, e.g.:
>
> julia> keys(Dict())
> Base.KeyIterator for a Dict{Any,Any} with 0 entries
>
> here I don't care about the type, I just want to iterate the keys.
>
> But of course, it's not that clear-cut: `linspace` has history, so does
> `zeros`. So, for a new container type I'd use the constructor `FooBar`.
>
> On Sun, 2016-06-19 at 23:12, Gabriel Gellner <gabriel...@gmail.com
> <javascript:>> wrote:
> > I am currently making some container like types, so I am using the
> > convention of studly caps for the types ie `FooBar`. For usage I am
> > confused on what the julian convention is for having expressive type
> > constructors like for `Dict` and `DataFrame`, versus using methods like
> > `linspace`. Clearly I could use either, but it is not clear to me when I
> > should use one convention over the other.
> >
> > Clearly I can have my api be like:
> >
> > f = FooBar(...)
> >
> > or
> >
> > f = foobar()
> >
> > but is one preferred over the other? Is it just random when to use one
> or
> > the other when making container like types?
>
