On 11/5/05, Sean Cazzell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't have very strong feelings one way or the other as long as things > are consistent. It is annoying to have to constantly stop and try to > remember if a method is foo.doSomething or foo.do_something. > > But I am noticing the core of TG and most of the third-party components > use mixedCase while some of the newer TG code is dutifully following the > recommended PEP 8 underscore style. This means TG is not even using > consistent naming itself. > > Since SQLObject and CherryPy use mixedCase style TG probably should > break with the PEP in this case. > > FWIW, I don't think that PEP 8 is neutral on this topic, but we have to > live with what we have.
Personally, I am a fan of mixedCase (possibly just got used to it from Java, but I think it's more likely that i like it because it's faster to type). But, having PEP8 around is nice because it's a thorough style guide that is already written. That was why I opted for PEP8. You're correct that some of the earlier TurboGears bits did not follow PEP8, and that should be fixed. I *would* actually agree with you that breaking from PEP8 for mixedCase is a good thing (and you're correct that it's not neutral on this topic). However, there was this thread on the CherryPy list: http://tinyurl.com/74kzo So, CP 2.2 might be switching to PEP8. I should probably query about that, though. If CP is switching to PEP8, then I'll try to make TurboGears consistently names_with_underscores before 1.0. If CP is going to stick with mixedCase, then changing TurboGears to mixedCase is a good idea. Kevin
