[Python-Dev] Further PEP 8 compliance issues in threading and multiprocessing

Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Tue Sep 2 11:52:05 CEST 2008

Tony Nelson wrote:
> I suppose the question is what a capitalized name promises.  If it means
> only "Class", then how should "Returns a new object", either from a Class
> or a Factory, be shown?  Perhaps a new convention is needed for Factories?

Any function can always return a new object (e.g. operator.add(list1,
list2), so I don't think we need a special naming convention to
explicitly flag factory functions.

The question I am raising is whether or not aberrations in the other
direction (factory functions that are named like a class, incorrectly
implying they can be used as a base class or as part of isinstance() or
issubclass() checks) are enough of a concern to add additional aliases
to the threading API, and to further modify the multiprocessing API this
close to RC1.

(Issue 3352 actually provides a complete list of the names that are
potentially at issue for both multiprocessing and threading - note that
Ben, with my concurrence, has closed that issue on the assumption that
the current naming scheme for these factory functions is acceptable).


Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list