[Python-3000] packages in the stdlib
ronaldoussoren at mac.com
Sun Jun 4 10:45:28 CEST 2006
On 2-jun-2006, at 20:53, Terry Reedy wrote:
> "Aaron Bingham" <bingham at cenix-bioscience.com> wrote in message
> news:448001E4.5070003 at cenix-bioscience.com...
>>> For the latter (2 above), I think those who want such mostly
>>> agree in
>>> principle on a mostly two-level hierarchy with about 10-20 short
>>> the top-level, using the lib docs as a starting point for the
>> That's fine with me, but I still think we need a top-level prefix.
> I think that 10-20 reserved names is hardly such a burden that we
> need anything more on top to avoid collisions -- especially if the
> list is
> fixed. The currently problem is that modules can be added to the
> that clash with existing 3rd party modules. That would no longer
> under my variation of the classification proposal, which would
> include a
> misc package.
I'm -lots on a package named "misc". That's really poor naming,
almost as bad as "util". Misc is the "we don't know what to do with
these"-category and completely unobvious for anyone that doesn't
already know where to look. It seems to me that misc would end up
containing all modules and packages that don't fit in one of the
preconceived toplevel packages and don't have enough peers in the
misc package to move them to their own toplevel package.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2157 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/attachments/20060604/c031b399/attachment.bin
More information about the Python-3000