On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 20:09 -0600, Ian Bicking wrote: > I think it's reasonable to loosen the > phrasing a bit -- it's nearly always better to stay consistent with a > package than follow PEP 8 on this point.
I agree, but actually I think there's a wider point to be made. The worst of all possible worlds is a module that is internally inconsistent about any of the guidelines. But I think the text in the introduction makes this point well enough. There should be one clear recommendation for new code, and since we've had this for four years now, I think the underline_words recommendation should stand. -Barry
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
