[Python-Dev] PEP 371 Discussion (pyProcessing Module) (original) (raw)
r.m.oudkerk r.m.oudkerk at googlemail.com
Sun Jun 1 00:31:27 CEST 2008
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Alternative to more ABCs [was:] Iterable String Redux (aka String ABC)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 371 Discussion (pyProcessing Module)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 31/05/2008, Paul Moore <p.f.moore at gmail.com> wrote:
2008/5/30 Farshid Lashkari <flashk at gmail.com>:
I'm not sure if there will be any side affects to modifying sys.executable though. Should this be the official way of supporting embedded interpreters or should there be a multiprocessing.setExecutable() method? +1 for setExecutable (I'd prefer setexecutable, to be PEP 8 compliant). Make it explicit, rather than fiddling with stuff in sys manually.
That is easy to do.
An issue not mentioned in the PEP is naming conventions. In recent versions I have tried to consistently use mixedCase for functions and methods (other than factory functions) because that is what threading does (give or take settrace(), setprofile(), stack_size().)
I am certainly open to using lowercase/lower_case_with_underscores for all functions/methods except for Process's methods and possibly currentProcess(), but I would like some feed back on that.
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Alternative to more ABCs [was:] Iterable String Redux (aka String ABC)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP 371 Discussion (pyProcessing Module)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]