Is a good practice naming user defined python functions with prefix udf_?

As we know, usually python user defined functions are named like get_record_count(), add_numbers().
If the all the fucntions are defined in one submodule, e.g. my_function_module, I can import them " Import my_function_module as udf", then call them as udf.get_record_count(), udf.add_numbers().

But if the functions are in the same script with the main logic, to make the functions easy to search and manage, is it a good practice naming them with a prefix, like udf_get_record_count(), udf_add_numbers()?
Thank you!

It’s unnecessarily verbose. Where the function comes from can be deduced from the imports, and any source code editor worth using can handle searching for a function with ease.

If you really wanted to, you could define an alias for the current module:

import sys

udf = sys.modules[__name__]

def foo():
    pass

assert udf.foo is foo

I can’t think of a case where I would care enough to write udf.foo instead of just foo in the rest of the module, though.

In any given module, though, I’ll either recognize an unqualified name as being defined locally or as a well-known function whose source I already know. The benefit of foo.bar is to recognize the source of bar on sight, not to aid in finding bar if that’s what I know I’m searching for.