New package: SimpleLattices v0.0.1

[JuliaRegistrator]

• Registering package: SimpleLattices
• Repository: https://github.com/nicolasloizeau/SimpleLattices.jl
• Created by: @nicolasloizeau
• Version: v0.0.1
• Commit: 5905bb90f809ddad9fc7f57aa35faab39bcfe8af
• Reviewed by: @nicolasloizeau
• Reference: Register nicolasloizeau/LatticeMaker.jl#3 (comment)
• Description: Simple lattice constructors

[github-actions]

Hello, I am an automated registration bot. I help manage the registration process by checking your registration against a set of AutoMerge guidelines. If all these guidelines are met, this pull request will be merged automatically, completing your registration. It is strongly recommended to follow the guidelines, since otherwise the pull request needs to be manually reviewed and merged by a human.

1. New package registration

Please make sure that you have read the package naming guidelines.

2. AutoMerge Guidelines are all met! ✅

Your new package registration met all of the guidelines for auto-merging and is scheduled to be merged when the mandatory waiting period (3 days) has elapsed.

3. To pause or stop registration

If you want to prevent this pull request from being auto-merged, simply leave a comment. If you want to post a comment without blocking auto-merging, you must include the text [noblock] in your comment.

Tip: You can edit blocking comments to add [noblock] in order to unblock auto-merging.

[goerz]

[noblock] Personally, I have a bit of a dislike of the prefix Simple outside of the very narrow use case of developers of a particular package creating a version of their package with a more simplified API (as SciML likes to do). Outside of that, "simple" is a completely arbitrary and non-descriptive word. I would probably recommend LatticeConstructors for this, or something similar.

But this is just a pet peeve of mine, so I'll leave that up to you

[nicolasloizeau]

[noblock] Personally, I have a bit of a dislike of the prefix Simple outside of the very narrow use case of developers of a particular package creating a version of their package with a more simplified API (as SciML likes to do). Outside of that, "simple" is a completely arbitrary and non-descriptive word. I would probably recommend LatticeConstructors for this, or something similar.

But this is just a pet peeve of mine, so I'll leave that up to you

makes sense, I added "simple" just because Lattices is taken. I will rename. How about LatticeMaker ?

[goerz]

Sure, LatticeMaker would be fine

just because Lattices is taken.

That does of course raise the question of whether this code could be contributed to the existing Lattices. It doesn't seem like Lattices is terribly active, with only some "maintenance commits" in the last 5 years. Maybe that package is ripe for a new maintainer, and, being "experimental", this new code could be integrated with what exists, as a new breaking version? @emerali @abhro

Are there use cases of Lattices that could not be implemented by extending the new code in SimpleLattices a bit?

If this is not possible, or not a good fit, I'd say: by all means, register as LatticeMaker.

I'll make this comment blocking for now to make sure the PR doesn't accidentally automerge before the maintainers of Lattice have a chance to respond, or you want to resubmit as LatticeMaker.

[goerz]

Closing in favor of #150924