Is it bad style to override the built-in function `type`?

[Michael Herrmann]

Thanks for your replies, 

Emile, the link you gave is about attribute names, and does not give a definite answer. I wrote this post in hope for an answer to the question how many people here think it would be OK to override `type` in the very specific context of a GUI automation library, and how many people would not like it.

Roy, thanks for your input, we already have tried hard in the thread I quoted in my first post (http://bit.ly/10aOy4H). We found some non-conflicting names, however they're not quite as fitting as `type` and I'm here hoping to find out how "bad" overriding type would be, to be able to weigh it against the drawbacks of using a worse-fitting name. Regarding the website: I had never thought of that! ;-) I guess we should rename it to "About"...

I'm sorry for spamming this mailing list so much... I promise it won't be for much longer.

Best,
Michael

On Friday, November 23, 2012 5:12:39 PM UTC+1, Michael Herrmann wrote:
> Hi, 
> 
> 
> 
> do you think it's bad style to override the built-in function `type`? I'm co-developing a GUI automation library called Automa (http://www.getautoma.com) and 'type' would be a very fitting name for a function that generates artificial key strokes. 
> 
> 
> 
> This post is motivated by an already lengthy discussion on this mailing list (http://bit.ly/10aOy4H), where we tried to find alternative names for `type`. Many were found, but none are quite as fitting as 'type'. 
> 
> 
> 
> For the sake of avoiding a discussion that is already being lead elsewhere please confine this thread to what you generally think about overriding `type`, and post suggestions for alternative names or solutions in the other thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you very much!
> 
> Michael