[issue30426] why not use the same style func name. eg: int.to_bytes (with underline) and array.tobytes(without underline).

Eric V. Smith added the comment: We won't do that, because then we'd have two functions that do the same thing. There's no sense having to learn two functions, just to achieve consistency. Sorry. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30426] why not use the same style func name. eg: int.to_bytes (with underline) and array.tobytes(without underline).

zaazbb added the comment: how about add a unitive style function name, for a compatibility reason, keep the old function exists also. for example, add int.tobytes(), and keep int.to_bytes() exists. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30426] why not use the same style func name. eg: int.to_bytes (with underline) and array.tobytes(without underline).

Eric V. Smith added the comment: There's no particular reason, we just weren't careful about enforcing a consistent style, especially on older code. But whatever the reason, it's now too late to change this. -- nosy: +eric.smith resolution: -> wont fix stage: -> resolved status:

[issue30426] why not use the same style func name. eg: int.to_bytes (with underline) and array.tobytes(without underline).

Changes by jf : -- title: why not use the same style func name. eg: int.to_bytes (with underline or not) and array.tobytes(). -> why not use the same style func name. eg: int.to_bytes (with underline) and array.tobytes(without underline).