Opened 9 years ago

Last modified 9 years ago

#13678 closed enhancement

Allow tab completion of matrix constructor — at Version 5

Reported by: robertwb Owned by: jason, was
Priority: major Milestone: sage-5.7
Component: linear algebra Keywords:
Cc: Bouillaguet Merged in:
Authors: Robert Bradshaw, Volker Braun Reviewers: Volker Braun
Report Upstream: N/A Work issues:
Branch: Commit:
Dependencies: Stopgaps:

Status badges

Description (last modified by vbraun)

E.g. matrix.identity(...), matrix.random(...), matrix.load(...) etc. all discoverable by tab completion.

Apply 13678-matrix-methods_vb.patch

Change History (7)

Changed 9 years ago by robertwb

comment:1 Changed 9 years ago by robertwb

  • Status changed from new to needs_review

comment:2 Changed 9 years ago by rbeezer

Very nice! I discovered a couple constructors I didn't know about (just reading the patch). I'll add it to my queue of things to review, but anybody else should feel free to beat me to it.

comment:3 Changed 9 years ago by rbeezer

I like it! Works as advertised. I'll run tests shortly. In the meantime, a suggestion and a question.

(1) Stripping out "matrix" from the name of the method is a nice touch, but then the docstring appears (to the novice) to be talking about a slightly diffferent command than the one queried. Having ready access to constructors is the first step in experimenting with Sage, then tab-completion takes over for methods on that object. So tab-completion to discover constructors is fabulous. But it should be as totally straightforward as possible, IMHO.

What do you think of putting "matrix" back in the method names of the matrix object? Yes, it is verbose and redundant. It does not seem to complicate tab-completion (ie, you do not need to use tab any more in either scenario). And in the Sage library, authors can use the "old" method names without involving the matrix object (and I would think this would be preferable).

(2) Is there anyway to make the func_* methods on this object invisible on tab-completion? I have no real good idea if they are useful, or just detritus. It'd be great if matrix.<tab> only showed the constructors.


comment:4 Changed 9 years ago by robertwb

Both valid points of feedback.

(1) I'd lean towards not putting matrix back in the name; what if we modified some of the examples to use the new format as well? Would that make things clear that we're talking about the "same function." We could also (automatically) add a line in the docstring that "This function is available as matrix.identity or identity_matrix"

(2) Short of hiding them for all functions (-1 to that) another option is to matrix() a __call__ method on a class. If you want I can post a new patch doing this.

Changed 9 years ago by vbraun

Improved patch

comment:5 Changed 9 years ago by vbraun

  • Authors set to Robert Bradshaw, Volker Braun
  • Description modified (diff)
  • Reviewers set to Volker Braun

Great idea to use a decorator! I've implemented the __call__ version. Also, I gave the decorator an optional name= argument if you want to override the automatic name generation. But I'm happy with the matrix-removed names. I agree that it would be better if were then mentioned in the docstring of foo_matrix, feel free to fix this. But its not really necessary. I'm giving positive review to Robert's patch ;-)

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.