Ben Finney wrote:
Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ben Finney wrote:
The problem is, that makes it quite inconsistent with other "not"
uses (such as "assert_not_equal", "assert_not_in", etc.) I would
really prefer that all these "not" uses be gramatically consistent
for predictability. Is this a case where "assert_is_not" should
exist alongside "assert_not_is"?
If we can flip the word order in the language syntax, we can sure as
heck flip it in a method name :)
To be clear, I take it you're in favour of the following names (with
no aliases):
assert_equal assert_not_equal
assert_is assert_is_not
assert_in assert_not_in
assert_almost_equal assert_not_almost_equal
and so on; i.e. that 'assert_is_not' breaks the obvious pattern set by
the others, in the interest of matching Python's 'is not' grammar.
Well, I'd have said "in the interest of reading correctly in English",
though I have to acknowledge this may not be an issue for many Python
users whose first language not is English. "assert_not_is" is just
dissonant to my ears.
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
_______________________________________________
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
