Greg Ewing (using news.cis.dfn.de)
me at privacy.net
Wed Feb 26 03:45:32 CET 2003
Alex Martelli wrote:
> So basically, you're trying to deny or minimize this
> COST of case-sensitivity, no doubt because you are so
> attached to it for other reasons that you just need
> to convince yourself and/or others that it MUST be a
> good thing, period.
I do, indeed, like it for other reasons. Which is why,
if and when I find myself annoyed by some inconsistency
in naming conventions, my first thought is "I wish
module authors would be more consistent about naming
conventions", *not* "I wish Python were case-insensitive."
I don't blame case-sensitivity for the problem, you
And, by the way, I don't feel a pressing need to convince
anyone of anything here. I've explained the ways that I
like to make use of case-sensitivity, and that, for me,
the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. I acknowledge
that others may have had different experiences and come
to different conclusions.
If you'll forgive me for saying so, Alex, you seem to
be the one doing all the ranting and raving here...:-)
> Careful: you're contradicting your stance in another
> post, where you condemn the design of Python's standard
> library for using "too many different sets of conventions".
Hmmm, English language too sloppy... must file bug report...
Perhaps I should rephrase that as "not so many different
conventions that I can't cope". Ideally, there would only
be one convention, and by that criterion, two is too many.
But, pragmatically, I can cope with a few different
conventions in the modules that I use frequently.
> Don't look now, but I think your bias is showing...;-).
Well, of course I'm biased. We both are. If the suggestion
of another poster is correct, and our brains are wired
differently, then our biases are inbuilt, and we'll
just have to agree to disagree!
Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept,
University of Canterbury,
Christchurch, New Zealand
More information about the Python-list