[Python-Dev] PEP 292 for Python 2.4
Nick Coghlan
ncoghlan at iinet.net.au
Wed Jul 14 11:50:35 CEST 2004
François Pinard wrote:
> I know that `string' and `socket' exist, despite `string' is evanescent,
> but they surely forced users at choosing other identifiers where `string'
> and `socket' would have been perfect. It is very good news that, now
> in Python 2.3, `string' is unneeded most of times. Let us not repeat
> previous mistakes, or even nail them further by trying to be compatible
> with them.
I would suggest that bare type names are rarely appropriate for use a
variable names, except in toy examples.
If I'm reading someone else's code, and they create a string or a
socket, I want to know what it is _for_, rather than the mere fact this
it is a string or a socket.
If the type is all that is important, then prepending some simple word
such as 'a_string' or 'the_string' or 'my_string' makes it clear to the
maintainer that the object doesn't really have any significant semantic
meaning beyond its type.
Regards,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | Brisbane, Australia
Email: ncoghlan at email.com | Mobile: +61 409 573 268
More information about the Python-Dev
mailing list