Hello,
I am trying to figure out what name to give to the new category theory
module. I have considered a number of possibilities:
* ct -- this corresponds to the common abbreviation of "category
theory" as CT, but I'm afraid is absolutely non-suggestive;
* categories -- this seems to fit nic
On 23 May 2012 17:25, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to figure out what name to give to the new category theory
> module. I have considered a number of possibilities:
>
> * ct -- this corresponds to the common abbreviation of "category
> theory" as CT, but I'm afraid is absolutely
> * categories -- this seems to fit nicely with the nomenclature of
> existing modules in SymPy (polys, series, integrals, matrices,
> etc.), however, I am not sure as to the intuitiveness of this name
> either; I wonder how easy it would be to confuse this name for
> something having to do wit
Hi,
I have no strong opinion and I don't think it matters much either way.
If we come up with an ingenious choice later (before the first release,
obviously), renaming is always a possiblity.
I agree ct is too short. Imho it shouldn't be too long either (because
then I have difficulty thinki
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Chris Smith wrote:
>
>> * categories -- this seems to fit nicely with the nomenclature of
>> existing modules in SymPy (polys, series, integrals, matrices,
>> etc.), however, I am not sure as to the intuitiveness of this name
>> either; I wonder how easy it woul
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 6:35 PM, krastanov.ste...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On 23 May 2012 17:25, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
>>
>> * categorytheory -- the fairest and the easiest to read, but it might
>> be a bit too long; it's my favourite though.
>
> I would like an underscore there: category_theory
I don
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Tom Bachmann wrote:
>
> I have no strong opinion and I don't think it matters much either way. If we
> come up with an ingenious choice later (before the first release,
> obviously), renaming is always a possiblity.
Sure.
> My personal favorite would be categorie
Am 23.05.2012 17:37, schrieb Chris Smith:
This is ok, too. ntheory is used for 'numbertheory' so maybe ctheory
could be used?
That naming scheme will give "gtheory" for both group theory and game
theory.
For that reason, I consider "ntheory" a naming mistake best not repeated.
--
You receive
Am 23.05.2012 17:45, schrieb Tom Bachmann:
I agree ct is too short. Imho it shouldn't be too long either (because
then I have difficulty thinking the module name in my head -- not sure
if this explanation makes sense or is even relevant).
Yes, it does make sense and yes, it is relevant.
If some
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:35 AM, krastanov.ste...@gmail.com
wrote:
> On 23 May 2012 17:25, Sergiu Ivanov wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am trying to figure out what name to give to the new category theory
>> module. I have considered a number of possibilities:
>>
>> * ct -- this corresponds to the com
>>
>> And shamelessly hijacking the thread: are there any objections to
>> `differential_geometry` for the module on which I am working?
>
> How about diffgeo, or diffgeometry?
>
diffgeometry sounds a bit better than the current one. I will probably
use it. I was also amused by the option to call
Am Mittwoch, 23. Mai 2012 21:52:32 UTC+2 schrieb Aaron Meurer:
> How about diffgeo, or diffgeometry?
>
I like diffgeo most, because it's short.
Vinzent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sympy" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Vinzent Steinberg
wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 23. Mai 2012 21:52:32 UTC+2 schrieb Aaron Meurer:
>>
>> How about diffgeo, or diffgeometry?
>
>
> I like diffgeo most, because it's short.
We use "geo" for geography (which I know doesn't apply to a CAS) but
perhaps it could
13 matches
Mail list logo
