To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I hope Python 3.0 will have a more systematic and well-organized standard library. Unlike for Java, there seem to be no enforced naming conventions.
As far as I know, there are no enforced naming conventions in Java either. E.g. nothing in java prevents you from have lower case names for classes,
or name your packages any way you want.
The main difference is that when java was released, Sun tried to educate their new users on how java code should look, e.g. by supplying plenty of code examples.
Other than that letting the language enforce naming conventions is a good idea, and I really would like to see it in Python.
How the file thing an impurity? open is a constructor that returns a file object. File objects support close methods.
You could have something like:
f = file()
f.open(...)
f.close(...)
but that's just longer for no reason.
Constructors are inherently non-object methods, for obvious reasons!





Member since:
2005-07-09
I hope Python 3.0 will have a more systematic and well-organized standard library. Unlike for Java, there seem to be no enforced naming conventions.
Moreover, I hope Python 3.0 will be COMPLETELY object oriented, like Ruby but with easier syntax. Currently, it feels patched on in too many ways and makes me reminiscent of C++. For example to open a file it's "f = open("text.txt")" but to close it it's "f.close()".
All of these inconsistencies and impurities needed to be eliminated. Although, Python in its current form is already one of my favorite languages.