[Nick Coghlan]
> George Sakkis wrote:
>
> >Still the word "open" sounds too general if the meaning is "open
> >a file-like object"; OTOH this could be a good thing if in some
> >future version "open('http://www.python.org')" was e.g. an alias to
> >urllib2.urlopen.
> Exactly the reason the BDFL gave for preferring 'open' - it may be extended
> to opening other types of objects than files.
So, when we *know* we are opening a file, `file' cannot be a bad choice! :-)
Moreover, practically, most of the times, we know we are opening a file.
`open' is opened (sic!) for some future magic. I prefer to protect my
programs against future magic, until this magic is precisely specified.
--
François Pinard http://pinard.progiciels-bpi.ca
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
