Maybe a more convenient way of getting global indices of subdomain objects
See original GitHub issueMaybe we’ve talked about it in the past. I think getting global indices of subdomain objects should be more convenient than doing:
network.map_pores(geom_A.Ps, origin=geom_A)
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 4 years ago
- Comments:6 (6 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Root Domain Vs Subdomain | Which Is Best For SEO?
Root Domain vs Subdomain, find out which one is best from the SEO perspective. ... Individual pages enjoy being on strong subdomains &...
Read more >An In-Depth Look At International SEO (+Step-By-Step ...
This in-depth guide on international SEO is was created to ... team which is probably looking for the most convenient way of doing...
Read more >4. Finding Subdomains - Web Application Security [Book]
Being able to iteratively find and record subdomains powering a web application is a useful first recon technique against that web application.
Read more >How to map a subdomain to an existing controller action in ...
My point is not to have a home page which is pointing to items.dev:3000, instead items.dev:3000 should point to items#index action. – gates....
Read more >When to Use Subdomains and Subdirectories - FourFront
Subdomains and subdirectories are the most widely-used methods for making the core structure of a website more SEO-friendly.
Read more >
Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start Free
Top Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found

Yes, but the only problem is that you must have labelled the pores on
obj. We could enhance theporesmethod to accept an array as well as string. If string -> look up pores, if array -> just use them directly. Would be about 3 lines to add.The only down side is that accepting such a wide variety of arguments starts to make the methods unpredictable and complex. For instance, we used to accept objects handles AND names in many functions, but decided to go with handles everywhere for consistency.
I’d be willing to make an exception this time though.
I see, it’s just that
obj.pores([1,3], target=network)to me seems more readable and self-descriptive thannetwork.map_pores([1, 3], origin=obj), though it might as well just be my preference.But, I see your point about consistency.