Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Decide on a naming strategy #13

Open
wkearn opened this issue Apr 18, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Decide on a naming strategy #13

wkearn opened this issue Apr 18, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation meta question Further information is requested

Comments

@wkearn
Copy link
Contributor

wkearn commented Apr 18, 2024

#11 adds a GridObject class, which has a different name from GRIDobj as used in the MATLAB version. There is some discussion in #11 about naming, but nothing was settled, and I can see good arguments for both or even for other options. I want to merge #11 so we can start moving forward with figuring out some of the package's functionality, but I want to make sure that we still decide what the names should be, not just for GRIDobj/GridObject, but for other data structures and functions that we might need going forward.

@Teschl
Copy link
Contributor

Teschl commented Apr 24, 2024

Regarding GRIDobj, we can either decide on one name for GRIDobj or add multiple aliases (which could lead to confusion). I far as I was aware, we need to decide between:

  • GRIDobj
  • GridObject
  • Grid

What solution would you prefer @wschwanghart ?

@wschwanghart
Copy link

I would certainly prefer the awkward but familiar name GRIDobj. 😉

@wkearn wkearn added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation question Further information is requested labels May 7, 2024
@wkearn wkearn added the meta label Aug 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation meta question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants