Thanks, Steven.
On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> Eric Snow wrote:
>
>> Anyone know the story behind the lower-case names for the
>> non-exception built-in types (like list and type)? I am guessing that
>> they were originally factory functions that, at some point, graduated
>> to full types; and the names were kept lower-case for backward
>> compatibility.
>
> Exactly.
>
> [steve@sylar ~]$ python1.5
> Python 1.5.2 (#1, Apr 1 2009, 22:55:54) [GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat
> 4.1.2-27)] on linux2
> Copyright 1991-1995 Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam
>>>> type(int)
> <type 'builtin_function_or_method'>
>
>
>> However, if we were to consider making a change for Python 4, I am not
>> sure how I feel about Int("5") over int("5"). Maybe it would be
>> Integer("5").
>>
>> Regardless, perhaps the type names are still lower-case for some other
>> valid reason. If so, I would love to know what that is. Is there any
>> merit to having lower-cased class names?
>
>
> Backwards compatibility and tradition.
>
> Many languages have functions to convert a value into a string, integer or
> float, which are usually written something like str(), int() and float().
> It would seem strange to write them as Str(), Int() and Float() in Python
> just because they happen to be types.
>
> Maybe in Python 4000 there will be a push to rationalise the case of
> built-in types.
>
>
>
> --
> Steven
>
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
