Reduce number of arguments of recognition methods #355
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Right now recognition methods take two arguments: `ri` and `G`.
But `G` is always identical to `Grp(ri)`. Alas, not everyone will
know this, e.g. I am re-discovering this every time I start
digging into recog again. This can be very confusing ("why are
both these groups around? Is there any subtle difference????").
One could solve that by trying to document this, but I think it is
much better to just remove the second argument.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Right now recognition methods take two arguments:
riandG. ButGis always identical toGrp(ri). Alas, not everyone will know this, e.g. I am re-discovering this every time I start digging into recog again. This can be very confusing ("why are both these groups around? Is there any subtle difference????"). One could solve that by trying to document this, but I think it is much better to just remove the second argument.This is incomplete, a lot more needs to be changed in methods. This can only be partially automated with classical scripts (and I don't trust AI to do this), but it's actually not hard to do. Alas: I'd like to defer this until after merging PR #330 (and perhaps a few others, to minimize conflicts for those).