What do you name this package?
Our team went through this exercise semi-recently, and we're curious about how everyone else would think about it. Here's a (non-exhaustive) list of options we considered: imports, ingest, dataimport, ímport, impørt.
What do you name this package?
Our team went through this exercise semi-recently, and we're curious about how everyone else would think about it. Here's a (non-exhaustive) list of options we considered: imports, ingest, dataimport, ímport, impørt.
a few good principles (not rules) for naming libraries:
a) signal abstraction level
b) avoid being too literal for it constrains evolution
c) pronounceable and spellable
d) prefer nouns over verbs because libraries are things not actions
e) metaphors beat descriptions
Consequently, I would avoid imports, ímport, impørt
"Ingest" feels like it is in a good direction. Any good reason not to use it?
To come up with other names I’d probably think about additional context. What is being imported, how is it being done? Can those concepts be spun into a name?
Not rhetorical questions. You presumably have real reasons to create the package; meditating on them will bring you closer to an understanding. The reason that naming things is one of the "hard CS problems" is that it requires actually paying attention to your own work and a solution can't be looked up elsewhere.
importers
advantage: still single words correctly spelt. describes the library instead of abstractly the topic of the library
dataloader.loadAll
dataloader.open
dataloader.import
btilly•1mo ago
I've called this kind of thing load, initialize, get_all, and so on.
I may also call it something based on where the data is stored if that is important. For example from_csv.
I might also name it based on what it is for. For example load_config.
Whatever seems clearest, and fits best with how the project itself does things.