[Python-Dev] Re: logging package -- rename warn to warning?

[Vinay Sajip]

> I thought one reason for the current names is that they match the
> log4j tool and all the other language's versions of that tool.  I'd
> like to see the package keep the standard names to make it easier for
> someone to pick up this package.

I think the main source of familiarity for log4j users (or
java.util.logging) will be that the"main" design and classes in the package
mirror those in the Java world - Loggers and Handlers, dotted-namespace
hierarchy for loggers, etc. I don't think that having slightly different
names would be a problem, given that we think our names are better! Several
versions of log4j (e.g. log4p, log4net) seem to have been a little too
faithful in their translation of log4j. For example, levels are first-class
objects - which I think is overkill. But then, class proliferation seems to
be a Java idiom in some quarters :-(

Regards,

Vinay