Pol Febrer Calabozo

I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean by categories that are not atom wise. What does "categorizing" mean for you? For me it means assigning a category to...

> My proposal can search for any rings using a simple deterministic approach that defines how a ring should be percieved. But I propose to do exactly the same as...

> But, I guess all this could be resolved by exposing the functional equivalents? However, it poses some problems. > When you do "color": Z the viz code still needs...

Which methods would you overwrite? What I mean is that this could be the result returned from the property, not the `AtomProperty` class itself. Maybe just something like an extra...

Alternatively we could return a simple `xarray.DataArray`, which already supports storing `attrs`.

That we can store arbitrary attributes without subclassing and there is a built-in way of storing information about coordinates. Also it is easy to merge dataarrays of different dtype into...

I don't know how would the rings thing turn out in the end, but the differences between the current categories and (possible future) atom properties are: - Up until now,...

What methods would an atom category have that an atom property doesn't? Also, your plans are still to put the rings functionality into a category, right? Could you clarify what...

> What about allowing somekind of grid directly? Do you mean interpolating the grid into another grid?

Ok, that is my final goal (I'm thinking of ways to speed up the computation of the psi values). But I'm not sure if there is a faster/better way than...