By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
454,525 Members | 1,623 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 454,525 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

poll: does name conventions in python matters?

P: n/a
in python it is common to see naming
inconsistencies ,methods,modules,packages,classes with names in every
posible style:
thisisalongmethod
ThisIsALongMethod
thisIsALongMethod
this_is_a_long_method
and even This_Is_A_Long_Method
All over the place,even within one module!

classic static languages dont really need naming conventions, on the other
side dynamic languages must have it(in my opinion),since there is a lot of
syntax variability and very short constructors, a clear example is what
does this means?
c = Required(2)
is it a method which returns an object or is it a class constructor?
this kind of situation greatly decrease readability.

whats your opinion on the matter?

a) dont care about naming conventions, i use the one i like
b) didnt know python has naming conventions,nobody follows them
c) naming convention doesnt matters
d) i would use one if there was a clear and concise document about python
naming style(python style guide is vague)
e) i think is very important for readability of source code and easier to
use libraries
d) other, explain please

if you care about it,how could be fixed?

if clear conventions were defined,would you change your current naming
style?

stdlib modules are not going to be touched,but for any new proyect i think
python would benefit from an improved,well defined,strict style guide,the
one now(http://www.python.org/doc/essays/styleguide.html) is so vague that
is not helpfull at all.

Ruby for example have a clear naming convention,if python had one,it would
benefit greater than ruby,since python source code is much more readable as
it is,but it could be better.
Jul 19 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
4 Replies


P: n/a
vegetax wrote:
in python it is common to see naming
inconsistencies ,methods,modules,packages,classes with names in every
posible style:
thisisalongmethod
ThisIsALongMethod
thisIsALongMethod
this_is_a_long_method
and even This_Is_A_Long_Method
All over the place,even within one module!

classic static languages dont really need naming conventions, on the other
side dynamic languages must have it(in my opinion),since there is a lot of
syntax variability and very short constructors, a clear example is what
does this means?
c = Required(2)
is it a method which returns an object or is it a class constructor?
this kind of situation greatly decrease readability.

whats your opinion on the matter?


If you really worry about it, why don't you capitalise your English? :-)

David
Jul 19 '05 #2

P: n/a
vegetax wrote:
in python it is common to see naming
inconsistencies ,methods,modules,packages,classes with names in every
posible style:
thisisalongmethod
ThisIsALongMethod
thisIsALongMethod
this_is_a_long_method
and even This_Is_A_Long_Method
All over the place,even within one module!


You certainly won't find most of those in a single
module, at least not in the standard library. You
might find a couple. Check out the PEP(s) on the
topic, and just follow the conventions of whatever
code you are working with.

If you are working with new code and need to choose
something from scratch, go with your personal preference
and be consistent.

If all the above fail, use "names_like_this" or
"namesLikeThis". If you really need somebody else
to tell you what to use: use the latter, because
I told you to. ;-)

-Peter
Jul 19 '05 #3

P: n/a
Peter Hansen wrote:
vegetax wrote:
in python it is common to see naming
inconsistencies ,methods,modules,packages,classes with names in every
posible style:
thisisalongmethod
ThisIsALongMethod
thisIsALongMethod
this_is_a_long_method
and even This_Is_A_Long_Method
All over the place,even within one module!
You certainly won't find most of those in a single
module, at least not in the standard library. You
might find a couple.


there are some of those inconsistent cases in the stdlib,check the sys
module which mixes a_method with amethod all over the place.

If you are working with new code and need to choose
something from scratch, go with your personal preference
and be consistent.

If all the above fail, use "names_like_this" or
"namesLikeThis". If you really need somebody else
to tell you what to use: use the latter, because
I told you to. ;-)

-Peter


Yes sir! =)
I actually follow the scheme you mentioned,the problem lies when you are
using several of this libs in a module and you have to mix all kind of
naming conventions (including yours) which makes the code less readable.

Jul 19 '05 #4

P: n/a
Peter Hansen wrote:
If all the above fail, use "names_like_this" or
"namesLikeThis". If you really need somebody else
to tell you what to use: use the latter, because
I told you to. ;-)


No, no. Use the former, because *I* told you to. ;-)
--
Michael Hoffman
Jul 19 '05 #5

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.