You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The use of GapObj as a constructor is getting more and more popular.
Currently the implementation provides just GapObj(obj, recursive), and GapObj(obj; recursive = false),
and delegates to the three argument version julia_to_gap(obj, IdDict(); recursive).
This way, calling GapObj with one argument often runs via julia_to_gap(obj, IdDict(); recursive) into the default method of julia_to_gap that discards the last two arguments.
Can't we use GapObj and julia_to_gap as synonyms?
Then this detour would be avoided, and the special one-argument method would be called directly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The use of
GapObj
as a constructor is getting more and more popular.Currently the implementation provides just
GapObj(obj, recursive)
, andGapObj(obj; recursive = false)
,and delegates to the three argument version
julia_to_gap(obj, IdDict(); recursive)
.This way, calling
GapObj
with one argument often runs viajulia_to_gap(obj, IdDict(); recursive)
into the default method ofjulia_to_gap
that discards the last two arguments.Can't we use
GapObj
andjulia_to_gap
as synonyms?Then this detour would be avoided, and the special one-argument method would be called directly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: