On (27/05/15 10:49), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 05/27/2015 08:55 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>On (26/05/15 20:49), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>On 05/26/2015 07:56 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>On (26/05/15 13:03), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>>>>On 05/26/2015 09:25 AM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>>>>It's better to do not mix utility functions.
>>>>>So feel free to split file to subfiles if it will be used among many
files
>>>>>or include helper function directly to module. You can later extract
helper
>>>>>function to another utility module when there will be use case.
>>>>>(run_shell is not used atm)
>>>>>
>>>>>And here are proposed names. string_utils | utils_string |
utils.string,
>>>>>shell_utils (python already has shutil) ...
>>>>
>>>>Hmm, you asked me to change the "misc.py" name, but now
you're suggesting we
>>>>should split it. Is it really worth it for three tiny functions? What if
we
>>>>just rename it to "util.py", or some other name which you find
more suitable?
>>>>
>>>OK, it does not worth to block patches
>>
>>Thank you :) Would you still like me to rename the file?
>>
>Yes, please.
So, should it be "util.py", or something else?
Yes.
LS