On Tue, 15 May 2007 10:44:37 -0700, John Nagle wrote: > We have to have visually unique identifiers.
Well, Python has existed for years without such a requirement, so I think "have to" is too strong a term. Compare: thisisareallylongbutcompletelylegalidentiferandnotvisuallyuniqueataglance with thisisareallylongbutcompletelylegalidentiferadnnotvisuallyuniqueataglance I imagine, decades ago, people arguing against the introduction of long identifiers because of the risk that their projects will be flooded with Black Hats trying to slip one over them by using the vulnerability cause by really long identifiers. I can just see people banging away on their keyboard, swearing black and blue that identifiers of more than four characters are completely unnecessary (who needs more than 450,000 variables in a program?) and will just cause the End Of Programming As We Know It. rn = m = None IIl0 = IlIO = None I'm sure that the Python community has zero sympathy for anyone suggesting that Python should _enforce_ rules like "don't use a single l as an identifier", even if they have complete sympathy with anybody who has such a rule in their own projects. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
