Steven D'Aprano added the comment:
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 12:00:31PM +, krey wrote:
> @steven.daprano My suggestion was changing the names of the args, not the
> order
>
> Current
> def os.symlink(src, dst):
> ln -s src dst
So far so good.
> Changing the names
> def
Steven D'Aprano added the comment:
There is no one single set of names used by `ln` that we could have
chosen. Any choice we made would have annoyed some people.
I strongly argue that, of all the various naming conventions in common
usage (see below), Python's choice of src, dest (source,
krey added the comment:
@eric.smith Fair enough, though the impact would probably be quite low in
reality. Nobody seems to pass these args by keyword:
https://github.com/search?q=%22os.symlink(src%3D%22=Code
@steven.daprano My suggestion was changing the names of the args, not the order
Eric V. Smith added the comment:
There's really no way we'd consider breaking possibly millions of working
programs to change the parameter names. I guess you could come up with some way
of supporting both sets of parameter names, but I doubt we'd accept that,
either.
While maybe in
Steven D'Aprano added the comment:
Yes, we have a process:
- At least one full release with a pending deprecation warning (silent
by default); 3.11 is the earliest that could take place.
- At least one full release with an active deprecation warning; 3.12
would be the earliest for this.
krey added the comment:
@eric.smith Sorry for tagging this as docs, wasn't sure what to pick. I guess
it should be under Library
Does CPython have a process for changing arg names via deprecation warnings?
--
___
Python tracker
Eric V. Smith added the comment:
@krey: What's your suggested change? We can change neither the parameter order
nor parameter names without breaking code, so that won't happen.
You created this as a documentation issue. Do you have a suggested
documentation change?
--
nosy:
Steven D'Aprano added the comment:
Order of arguments for ln:
ln -s SOURCE DESTINATION
Order of arguments for os.symlink:
os.symlink(SOURCE, DESTINATION)
They are exactly the same order.
> Everywhere else I've seen, arrows (or directed edges in a graph) point as
> SOURCE -> TARGET
krey added the comment:
OK, let's ignore the analogy.
Everywhere else I've seen, arrows (or directed edges in a graph) point as
SOURCE -> TARGET
SOURCE -> DESTINATION
(TARGET and DESTINATION are synonymous in this context)
An example from math:
Steven D'Aprano added the comment:
There is nothing wrong with saying
Create a symbolic link pointing to `src` named `dst`.
That is grammatically correct English.
We could say "create a sym link called dst pointing to src" but they mean
exactly the same thing. And given that the order
New submission from krey :
From: https://docs.python.org/3/library/os.html
os.symlink(src, dst, target_is_directory=False, *, dir_fd=None)
Create a symbolic link pointing to `src` named `dst`.
It's a bit like saying
find(needle, haystack)
Finds `haystack` in `needle`
If you look
11 matches
Mail list logo
