Stayvoid wrote:
.py to the file name? I'd argue against it.
I strongly disagree.
"The filename extension was originally used to easily determine the
file's generic type." [1]
Imagine a system without extensions. It will be such a mess!
I find it's usually not a problem on GNU/Linux. Also note "sharply
deprecated in UNIX-derived systems like Linux" in that same article.
The person running the software doesn't need to care (or know) what its written
in.
It's usually better to provide more information.
.py is more informative that just "a file."
For data files it can be convenient. For executables it's usually in the
way. A command should just express what it is (e.g. oowriter) or what it
does (e.g. startx). If you care about implementation, go find the source
code.
I've looked through some projects written in Python. [2, 3, 4] All of
them have the extension for the source code.
All of those are libraries. They keep the extension by convention.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filename_extension
[2] https://github.com/pybrain/pybrain
[3] https://github.com/scipy/scipy
[4] https://github.com/numpy/numpy
_______________________________________________
gNewSense-dev mailing list
gNewSense-dev@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-dev
