Drop compute_ from function names?

[niksirbi]

All our functions for computing metrics derived from the data take the form compute_metric, for example:

• compute_velocity()
• compute_path_length()
• compute_interindividual_distances()
• compute_norm()

Pros:

• consistency
• being super explicit about this function invoking the computation of some variable

Cons:

• Verbose
• Makes code lines long (hence more commands have to be split across lines)
• Is somewhat redundant? Most python users understand that calling a foo() (with brackets) will trigger some computation (as apposed to object.property)

I can't think of many packages that something similar to this, happy to change my mind.

[roaldarbol]

Think it's a matter of opinion. Using verbs for method names and nouns for object names is not part of PEP 8, but some consider it best practice. In R it's very standard that function names are verbs; for the tidyverse it's by convention. Personally I like it, especially if it doesn't return a new object of the same name (e.g. get_horse returns horse, not get_horse)

[niksirbi]

Good points, thanks for chiming in on this!

[roaldarbol]

Just saw this landing page for an R package (tidyplots); try having a look at the figure by the link to the bioRxiv preprint - that's something I'd want for animovement at least - using verbs deliberately and consistently. Where it's almost possible to reason your way to the function you need next. :)

[niksirbi]

I like the concept of "action verbs", quite inspiring.

[niksirbi]

After a few discussions, and also taking into account @roaldarbol's input, I will close this as "not planned".
Starting function names with "action verbs" has its benefits, even if it's more "verbose". So we're keeping the compute_!