On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:44 AM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 06:17:09PM +0100, Victor Stinner wrote: > > Hi Bernat, > > > > "stdlib_module_names" was my first idea but it looks too long, so I > > chose "module_names". But someone on Twitter and now you asked me why > > not "stdlib_module_names", so I wrote a PR to rename module_names to > > sys.stdlib_module_names: > > https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/24332 > > > > At least "stdlib_module_names" better summarizes its definition: "A > > frozenset of strings containing the names of standard library > > modules". > > Your first instinct that it is too long is correct. Just call it > "stdlib" or "stdlib_names". The fact that it is a frozen set of module > names will be obvious from just looking at it, and there is no need for > the name to explain everything about it. We have:
The sys module already has a sys.modules attribute, and so sys.module_names sounds like "give me the name of all imported modules": sys.module.keys(). It's confusing. Just after I announced the creation of the attribute, at least 3 people told me that they were confused by the name. Also, my PR was approved quickly 3 times which confirms that the rename was a good idea ;-) In general, I agree that short names are great ;-) For example, I like short obj.name() rather than obj.getname() when it doesn't make sense to set the name. Naming is a hard problem :-D Victor -- Night gathers, and now my watch begins. It shall not end until my death. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/DKRUV2HDWIN4XWDNXT55BBHNQOUZTOU6/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
