Package naming

[lorenzwalthert]

Hi @yitao-li, cool work 🥳 .I know you already published on CRAN but I was just wondering if the package should be renamed {cuml} to make it consistent with existing R ML packages from the tidy/mlverse:

• keras (and not kerasR, which is another R interface)
• tensorflow
• torch (and not rTorch, which is another R interface)
• tabnet
• ...

Given that this package is not yet widely used or advertised, I name change would be relatively 'cheap'. I know I have no stake in this what so ever, just thinking out loud. Feel free to close with no comment :-)

[yitao-li]

I see. That's a great suggestion! Thanks. I didn't even realize there was this naming convention : )

[yitao-li]

I'm inclined to rename cuml4r to cuml, but then realized there are some places where cuml the C++ library and the cuml4r the R package are mentioned in the same sentence or in the same paragraph within the roxygen docs. This makes the cuml4r to cuml renaming a bit challenging. E.g., there are (and will be more) places where I need to say if cuml4r is not compiled and linked with a valid version of cuml, then X will not happen and Y will happen instead... 🤔

I guess I can say "... not compiled and linked with a valid version of libcuml..." instead, but still, cuml4r somehow sounds like the least confusing name in those places 😄

[lorenzwalthert]

I see. I think alternatively, you could write „the R package“ and „the C++ package“ to distinguish. And/or use {cuml} to refer to the R package (another new convention not backed by the tidyverse style). I think the benefits of the convention may outweigh the drawbacks in these situations.