The names of some of the decorators (eg IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator) are rather annoyingly long. For example mh= IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.create(p, IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.PROTEIN) One uniform way of shortening them would be to just drop the decorator bit. On the documentation side, it works since I had already established the shorthand of saying XYZ particle instead of XYZDecorator instance particle. Such a change would just require running a sed script on people's code, so the cost of the update would be small. Thoughts? The new names would include: XYZ XYZR Residue Atom MolecularHierarchy: still kind of long, since it is now in atom we could drop the Molecular part and just make it IMP.atom.Hierarchy, but this causes problems if you do using or import on IMP.atom and IMP.core (as I tend to do) RigidBody
Thoughts, comments?
I think it is a great idea, lets just drop the Decorator part. it will make code shorter and more readable.
On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Daniel Russel drussel@gmail.com wrote: > The names of some of the decorators (eg > IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator) are rather annoyingly long. For > example > mh= IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.create(p, > IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.PROTEIN) > One uniform way of shortening them would be to just drop the decorator bit. > On the documentation side, it works since I had already established the > shorthand of saying XYZ particle instead of XYZDecorator instance particle. > Such a change would just require running a sed script on people's code, so > the cost of the update would be small. Thoughts? The new names would > include: > XYZ > XYZR > Residue > Atom > MolecularHierarchy: still kind of long, since it is now in atom we could > drop the Molecular part and just make it IMP.atom.Hierarchy, but this causes > problems if you do using or import on IMP.atom and IMP.core (as I tend to > do) > RigidBody > > Thoughts, comments? > > _______________________________________________ > IMP-dev mailing list > IMP-dev@salilab.org > https://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/imp-dev >
Daniel Russel wrote: > The names of some of the decorators (eg > IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator) are rather annoyingly long. For > example > mh= IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.create(p, > IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.PROTEIN) > One uniform way of shortening them would be to just drop the decorator > bit.
Sounds reasonable to me.
> MolecularHierarchy: still kind of long, since it is now in atom we could > drop the Molecular part and just make it IMP.atom.Hierarchy, but this > causes problems if you do using or import on IMP.atom and IMP.core (as I > tend to do)
Well... don't do that then. ;)
Ben
I also agree with the idea of shortening the names. It would make our life easier
Daniel Russel wrote: > The names of some of the decorators (eg > IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator) are rather annoyingly long. For > example > mh= IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.create(p, > IMP.atom.MolecularHierarchyDecorator.PROTEIN) > One uniform way of shortening them would be to just drop the decorator > bit. On the documentation side, it works since I had already > established the shorthand of saying XYZ particle instead of > XYZDecorator instance particle. Such a change would just require > running a sed script on people's code, so the cost of the update would > be small. Thoughts? The new names would include: > XYZ > XYZR > Residue > Atom > MolecularHierarchy: still kind of long, since it is now in atom we > could drop the Molecular part and just make it IMP.atom.Hierarchy, but > this causes problems if you do using or import on IMP.atom and > IMP.core (as I tend to do) > RigidBody > > Thoughts, comments? > > _______________________________________________ > IMP-dev mailing list > IMP-dev@salilab.org > https://salilab.org/mailman/listinfo/imp-dev
participants (4)
-
Ben Webb -
Daniel Russel -
Dina Schneidman -
Seung Joong Kim