On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 09:47:14AM +0000, Simon King wrote:
> Just to be clear: In the other regard (documentation!), it seems
> to me that @lazy_attribute is not suitable for API.
In general yes; if a lazy_attribute A.f returns the integer 1, we
cannot configure introspection on this integer to make A.f? useful.
On the other hand, in the use case I mentioned, that would be easy to
fix, e.g. by setting __doc__ appropriately in the constructed
morphism if/when deemed desirable (unlike for integers, we can make
sure that morphisms accept a __doc__ attribute; also the constructed
morphism won't be shared elsewhere where the documentation would not
make sense).
Cheers,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas M. Thiéry "Isil" <nthi...@users.sf.net>
http://Nicolas.Thiery.name/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
