It doesn't seem to me that math.nice has an obvious meaning. Regards, Michael
On 2/14/06, Crutcher Dunnavant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/12/06, Alan Gauld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> However I do dislike the name nice() - there is already a nice() in the > > >> os module with a fairly well understood function. But I'm sure some > > > > > Presumably it would be located somewhere like the math module. > > > > For sure, but let's avoid as many name clashes as we can. > > Python is very good at managing namespaces but there are still a > > lot of folks who favour the > > > > from x import * > > > > mode of working. > > Yes, and there are people who insist on drinking and driving, that > doesn't mean cars should be designed with that as a motivating > assumption. There are just too many places where you are going to get > name clashes, where something which is _obvious_ in one context will > have a different ( and _obvious_ ) meaning in another. Lets just keep > the namespaces clean, and not worry about inter-module conflicts. > > -- > Crutcher Dunnavant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > littlelanguages.com > monket.samedi-studios.com > _______________________________________________ > 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/michael.walter%40gmail.com > _______________________________________________ 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
