Compatibility with latest version of PySB #13
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…st version of PySB
|
@clopezx @johnbachman Looks good to me. How do you guys feel about leaving |
|
Hi Guys,
I think the best is to be consistent. I think <> in the comments and | in the code could be confusing to new users that don’t know the history… just my $0.02
… On Mar 30, 2020, at 8:01 AM, Jeremy Muhlich ***@***.***> wrote:
@clopezx <https://github.com/clopezx> @johnbachman <https://github.com/johnbachman> Looks good to me. How do you guys feel about leaving <> in the comments unchanged?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#13 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADKVBONJ337EWDY2WGL4YTRKCJ35ANCNFSM4LWQNG6Q>.
|
|
I thought the same as you @clopezx, that would make the code consistent and easier to understand for someone with programming background. On the other hand, I thought that someone coming from a chemical or biological background would find <> more suitable. |
|
hmmm. I see your point. I think if we define early on in the documentation that the | symbol means reversible, that should be enough. I worry that someone looking at the code and conflicting explanations would have issues. You can’t assume users are super smart (from my own user experience!)
c
… On Mar 30, 2020, at 10:12 AM, Agustín Andrés Corbat ***@***.***> wrote:
I thought the same as you @clopezx <https://github.com/clopezx>, that would make the code consistent and easier to understand for someone with programming background. On the other hand, I thought that someone coming from a chemical or biological background would find <> more suitable.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#13 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADKVBNBVNTJ47L2C36V5LDRKCZFRANCNFSM4LWQNG6Q>.
|
|
Another potential solution is changing the comments to use a syntax that's definitely not Python so the chance of confusion should be far lower. Maybe something like |
|
Related: I added Python 3 support to the lolab-vu/earm fork back in 2018 in this commit: LoLab-MSM@9236b55 Happy to PR that if you like. I didn't change the documentation re: the issue above. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I merely swapped <> operator for | in order to recover compatibility with latest version of PySB. I only replaced this occurrences in the code, not replacing them in the comments as I find <> more visually appealing to describe chemical reactions.