Added documentation strings to real and imaginary parts of complex units #2444
Conversation
Modelica/SIunits.mo
Outdated
| Complex(redeclare Modelica.SIunits.MagnetomotiveForce re, | ||
| redeclare Modelica.SIunits.MagnetomotiveForce im) | ||
| Complex(redeclare Modelica.SIunits.MagnetomotiveForce re "Real part of complex magnetomotive force", | ||
| redeclare Modelica.SIunits.MagnetomotiveForce im "Imaginary part of complex magnetomotive force") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Spelling: magneto motive or magnetomotive?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm.... either way I guess, see https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/magnetomotive-force and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetomotive_force. Since we spelled it MagnetomotiveForce, not MagnetoMotiveForce, in this context, I suppose that "magnetomotive force" is OK. I am, however, sure, that we have a couple different spellings in the MSL. So this issue is comparable to the multiphase/multi phase/multi-phase/poly phase discussion.
For now, I would go for magnetomotive force, and create a ticket, in case you want to initiate a discussion on the unification of the spelling of this term.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It is just that it is spelled differently next to each other.
https://github.com/christiankral/Modelica/blob/2a86acdc9d427ed006a452d7a1f9ebfb9612d386/Modelica/SIunits.mo#L1811-L1813
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see your point. The term "magnetomotive" is more often used than "magneto motive" in publications of http://ieeexplore.ieee.org. I propose: let's switch to "magnetomotive" on the long run and start change the naming. Would you mind to switch the doc string of the model "magnetomotive" before/after approving the pull request? Thanx.
beutlich
added
enhancement
see #2443