it would be nice to add to the docs something like this to codify the inheritance of the maps:
At some point we may have multiple subclasses under one of them, and this would accommodate that nicely.
Also, I was wondering what you think about making a naming convention, which is: all subclasses of Attmap are named in the same way, which is: ModifierAttMap, where Modifier is the lowest attribute in the class hierarchy above. This will avoid some of the confusion that we were facing with OrdPathExAttMap, which can get even hairy with 4-5 levels down (like EchoOrdPathExAttMap), etc. So we'd just say an "EchoAttMap" would fit this standard.
Our classes would be: AttMap, OrdAttMap, PathExAttMap, EchoAttMap at the moment. I'm working on another that will be:
provided by yacman, which will add the yaml reading/writing stuff.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
What's the upside to adding EchoAttMap and deliberately introducing the need for dual naming, rather than naming it AttMapEcho wherever you want to use it anew, and then doing all the changes in one sweep?
that I don't have to do all the work of changes in one sweep. development cycle continues normally.
really, to me, this seems like the only way to do it. I can't comprehend the approach of going through the effort to re-release all downstream stuff immediately.... it just doesn't make sense to me to do all that extra work. it's so much easier to just release 1 version of attmap that has 2 ways to do it, and then remove after the normal release cycles of all other software are complete...