El Sábado, 4 de Febrero de 2006 2:35, Giovanni Bajo escribió:
> Hello,
>
> my comments on the Path PEP:
>
> - Many methods contain the word 'path' in them. I suppose this is to help
> transition from the old library to the new library. But in the context of a
> new Python user, I don't think that Path.abspath() is optimal. Path.abs()
> looks better. Maybe it's not so fundamental to have exactly the same names
> of the old library, especially when thinking of future? If I rearrange my
> code to use Path, I can as well rename methods to something more sound at
> the same time.
I haven't revised the whole class to look exactly which methods contain the
word path and which do not. But, anyway this is just a simple comment. It's
clear to me that Path.abspath() look redundant and Path.abs() tells clearly
what the method does. But I think in most cases the method won't be used
through the class, like 'Path.abs(instance)' but through an existing instance
like 'home.abs()'. In this case, I think 'home.abspath()' would be more
readable than 'home.abs()'. Anyway, in the long term, I think people will
just get used to what gets finally decided, so I could say I'm +0 about this.
(Does one have to be a python developer or something to use the {+,-}{0,1}
thing?, 'cause I'm not.)
Regards,
Andy.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
