Message146392
| Author |
neologix |
| Recipients |
benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, loewis, neologix, petri.lehtinen, pitrou, rhettinger, rosslagerwall, vstinner |
| Date |
2011年10月25日.18:45:10 |
| SpamBayes Score |
3.6877324e-07 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1319568322.99.0.352396670297.issue13263@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> I think there is a value to use the very same function names in the
> posix module as in the posix API.
It would still be the case, except that they'd live in distinct submodule.
> The posix API (and C in general) is also flat, and uses the prefix
> convention.
That's because C doesn't have namespaces: it's certainly due to this limitation, and not a design choice (and when you think about it, there is a namespace hierarchy, in the header files: <sys/sched.h>, <attr/xatr.h>, etc.). |
|