Christian Heimes wrote: > I'm sending this mail to Python-dev in the hope to reach more developers. > > GvR likes to rename the __builtin__ to reduce confusing between > __builtin__ and __builtins__. He wanted to start a poll on the new name > but apparently he forgot. > >>From http://bugs.python.org/issue1498 > --- > In http://bugs.python.org/issue1774369 I mentioned that I wanted to > rename __builtins__ to __rootns__. Though right now I think something > longer and less cryptic might be better. The reason is to avoid for > once and for all the confusion between __builtin__, which is a module, > and __builtins__, a feature mainly used by sandboxing to pass the set of > builtins to be used via the global namespace. This lay at the heart of > the referenced bug. > > I'm still in favor of this but haven't had the time to investigate how > much work it would be. > [...] > OK, then we need to agree on a new name. I find __root__ too short, > __rootns__ too cryptic, and __root_namespace__ too long. :-) What else > have we got? > --- > > What name do you prefer? I'm +1 with Raymond on __root__ but I'm still > open for better suggestions. > The namespace should really be called __global__. I doubt this will fly, because it's too radical, and unfortunately would undermine the "global" keyword, used in 2.x to indicate that a name should be sought in the module namespace.
I doubt many people would want to replace "global" with "module". What's it being replaced with in 3.x? regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
