[Python-3000] packages in the stdlib

Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Sun Jun 4 21:18:15 CEST 2006

"Ronald Oussoren" <ronaldoussoren at mac.com> wrote in message 
news:63094894-36B0-4487-9992-F913D9749F08 at mac.com...
>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.

Without a misc package, we either need to have an all-inclusive set of top 
level categories (difficult) or else put the oddballs at top level, which 
counteracts the purpose of having categories.  The latter improperly 
highlites the oddballs and increases the chances of name-clashes --  
especially when more are added.  I have found catch-all categories very 
useful in other contexts.

Terry Jan Reedy

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list