(original) (raw)

\> > And I guess this is subjective: �conversely, the API you're proposing
\> > doesn't feel Pythonic to me. :-) �I'd like the hear the opinion of other
\> > python-dev readers.
\>
\> I agree with Mark: the proposed median, median.low, etc., doesn't feel
\> right. Is there any example of doing this in the stdlib? I suggest just
\> median(), median\_low(), etc.

I too prefer the median\_low naming rather than median.low. �I'm not
sure I can articulate why, but certainly the fact that that latter
isn't used anywhere else in the stdlib that I can think of is
probably a lot of it :)

Perhaps the underlying thought is that we don't use classes pure
function namespaces: �we expect classes to be something more than
that.