@glen wrote in StudioInfinity/dyna3#92 (comment):
We also settled on names Configuration for a raw collection of coordinates for everything,…
In the new Realization structure, the ConfigNeighborhood member could be called "outcome" or "output" or something -- it's name needn't just reiterate its type.
How about keeping the name…
@glen wrote in StudioInfinity/dyna3#92 (comment):
At the last meeting, we agreed to put the common code for examples where it makes the most…
During our meeting, we decided to name the structures like this:
pub type Configuration = DMatrix<f64>;
// a first-order neighborhood of a configuration
pub struct ConfigNeighborhoo…
What is currently called a Realization should perhaps just be called a Configuration -- if it is just coordinates, there's no guarantee that this data structure "realizes" any particular set of…
yes, we need sane names (i.e. not "mod.rs" for a file that has logging functions).
People who stare at Rust source trees all day will read the filename as common/mod.rs, which translates as…
The file
app-proto/run-exampleshas gotten more code-y in this PR, begging the question as to what command interpreter is intended to run it. Please rename it to make that clear from the file…
The file name
app-proto/examples/common/mod.rs(well, the "mod.rs" part specifically) is inscrutable to me.[…] Rust has apparently introduced a [new module filename system](http…
Intuitively to me, it would seem a Realization would be the natural outcome of trying to realize an Assembly...
Trying to realize an assembly doesn't always produce a realization (because it…
My perspective here is that realization happens within an assembly, so its results—including the descent history—belong to the assembly.
The upcoming history display pull feature will force…
Yes, the MIT comma is allowed in Rust, and [recommended](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/style-guide/index.html#trailing-comm…
@glen wrote in StudioInfinity/dyna3#92 (comment):
The file name
app-proto/examples/common/mod.rs(well, the "mod.rs" part specifically) is…
The incoming branch is now rebased onto the newly merged #91, so it's ready to merge, pending review!