RE: Context of option symbols

*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net*Subject*: [mg45490] RE: [mg45475] Context of option symbols*From*: "David Park" <djmp at earthlink.net>*Date*: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 00:00:37 -0500 (EST)*Sender*: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Selwyn, Generally I think you should write a usage message for each option name and value that is unique to your package. Sometimes you may overload a name already used in Mathematica. You can then add to the usage message for that name. For example the following is used in my Algebra`PushThrough` package $NewMessage[Constants, "usage"]; Constants::usage = Constants::usage <> " For the PushThrough routine, Constants specifies a list of symbols \ which will be treated as constants and not pushed through."; David Park djmp at earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~djmp/ From: Selwyn Hollis [mailto:sh2.7183 at misspelled.erthlink.net] To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net A programming question: In general, what context should be given to symbols representing option names? For instance, let's say I'm writing a package with context Foo`foo`, and a function in the package has an option named ColorSpec. In what context should ColorSpec exist? Or does it really matter? ----- Selwyn Hollis http://www.math.armstrong.edu/faculty/hollis (edit reply-to to reply)