Skip to content

Python sdk should follow python naming schema defined by PEP 8 #163

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
TakumiHendricksDev opened this issue Mar 19, 2025 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@TakumiHendricksDev
Copy link

It is a bit concerning that the entirety of this python library looks like java. I wish that the python SDK followed proper python naming conventions using upper camel case convention for class names and snake_case for functions and variables as defined by PEP 8.

While I understand this does not affect the functionality of this SDK, it absolutely improves the developer experience when using this python SDK.

I also understand this would probably affect a lot of people who decide to update their package to this version so I would probably make it a major release.

@TakumiHendricksDev TakumiHendricksDev changed the title Python sdk following naming schema Python sdk should follow python naming schema defined by PEP 8 Mar 19, 2025
@0x3at
Copy link

0x3at commented Mar 26, 2025

I would agree with this on many levels - this SDK is one of the most frustrating SDK's to deal with due to the lack of python standards.
The lack of comprehensive docstrings and improper naming conventions creates a hellish experience when attempting to build a new integration with this API.

As someone who has spent hours utilizing this SDK, implementing proper standards would increase speed to development and decrease pointless hurdles.

@TakumiHendricksDev
Copy link
Author

@0x3at Yeah. I did recently discover it looks like much of the sdk code is generated through xml so it is unlikely that this issue will actually be accepted :/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants