> >>OK, that's fine - warning/WARNING it is. For consistency, though, we should > >>also lose fatal/FATAL which are currently synonyms for critical/CRITICAL. > > > > Yes, except I find fatal/FATAL so much easier to write. Do we really > > need the "political correctness" of critical/CRITICAL? > > Are you seriously arguing for saving a few keystrokes? After adding > three to warn? =) Not at all. I think I've seen many loggers with a series of levels going something like warning, error, fatal. I've never seen 'critical' before in this context. Thus I find that it takes more mental work to remember or interpret 'critical' than 'fatal'. > It's not political correctness, it's technical correctness. I say do it > right for all the calls or leave it as is (or revert to Java compatibility). I know that 'critical' is technically more correct, but somehow I don't care. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4