Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #38091 > unrolled thread

Re: CamelCase vs. all-lowercase package names

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: CamelCase vs. all-lowercase package names Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-02-02 18:05 -0500

#38091 — Re: CamelCase vs. all-lowercase package names

On 2/2/2013 3:03 AM, dieter wrote:
> Rhubarb Sin <rhubarbsin@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> PEP-8 calls for "short, all-lowercase names" for packages:
>>
>> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#package-and-module-names
>
> This is mainly to support case insensitive file systems (and
> file systems with quite limited path length).

It also serves to differentiate a module from the main class it defines.
If file Module defines class Module, then the two possible imports
import Module
from Module import Module
make 'Module' later in the file ambiguous without referring to the top 
of the file for the import. But now, 'decimal' is the module and 
'Decimal' is the class (absent stupid renaming designed to confuse).

> With mixed case, some packages/modules may not conflict on
> a case sensitive file system but happen to conflict on a
> case insensitive file system.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web