[Yt-dev] Release 1.5

[Matthew Turk]

I understand; but what I am suggesting is that, from a diff of
FOF_Output and SS_HopOutput, they are largely identical.  I don't
think this is awesome; I agree that HOP should be the default, but
what I'd like to do is consolidate the code base.  If you'd rather not
explicitly import FOFHaloFinder in yt/mods.py I understand, but as
long as we're going to be working on this stuff in the near-term
future I think we should make it the best we can.

That being said, I greatly appreciate your reluctance to break known
entities.  But I don't think we have to -- I'd just like to see them
share a codebase, rather than a duplicated one!

-Matt

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Stephen Skory <stephenskory at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> 1. Join the yt/lagos/fof/FOF_Output.py and yt/lagos/hop/HOP_Output.py
>> files and put them as yt/lagos/HaloFinder.py
>> 2. Remove as much code duplication as possible between the two by
>> refactoring into a base class and two subclasses
>
>
> I'm actually kind of hesitant to do this. FoF works, but it's still what I'd call 'experimental.' I haven't done enough testing to trust it yet. I haven't even done a comparison suite with HOP. I think it's OK to put it out there and let people use it, it's not flaky in that sense. In my documentation, I'll write in bold letters something like 'FoF is mostly untested, so if you use it, check your results to make sure they're reasonable!'
>
> Although the chances are small, I don't want to merge together something trusted with something untrusted. Do you see what I mean?
>  _______________________________________________________
> sskory at physics.ucsd.edu           o__  Stephen Skory
> http://physics.ucsd.edu/~sskory/ _.>/ _Graduate Student
> ________________________________(_)_\(_)_______________
> _______________________________________________
> Yt-dev mailing list
> Yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>