nicolas.s-dev at laposte.net
Sat Feb 5 18:00:37 GMT 2011
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 11:24:44AM -0500, Ethan Glasser-Camp wrote:
> How do we feel about consistency of naming conventions in the code
> base? I see that most method names are wordsruntogether (ex:
> syncfolder, getaccountmeta), or wordsruntogether_specialversion
> (put_nowait, addmessagesflags_noconvert), but in general, Python
> (and PEP-8) encourages words_with_underscores. I'd prefer to use
> underscore-based names, but introducing them at this point ruins
> internal consistency, for the possible benefit of being more
> consistent with the Python ecosystem at some far-off future. But I'd
> really rather not use the current style for new code, seeing as it
> is, after all, not preferred for Python code.
> What do you guys think? Will you reject patches if they conform to PEP-8? :)
No, I won't reject any patch because of that.
I don't care much myself about naming conventions. I do about
readability of the code. Naming conventions are not _that_ important for
readability. Smart names, good refactoring, etc are much more important
than the way functions and classes look: with or without underscore is
not (and should not be) the point, IMHO.
More information about the OfflineIMAP-project