<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Nick Coghlan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ncoghlan@gmail.com" target="_blank">ncoghlan@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
So in this case, the vagueness of "data class" is considered a feature<br>
- since it doesn't inherently mean *anything*, folks are more likely<br>
to realise that they need to look up "Python data class", and if I<br>
search for that in a private window, the first Google hit is<br>
<a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3357581/using-python-class-as-a-data-container" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://stackoverflow.com/<wbr>questions/3357581/using-<wbr>python-class-as-a-data-<wbr>container</a><br>
and the second is Eric's PEP.<span class=""></span><br></blockquote></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I think "data classes" is a fine moniker for this concept.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">It's ironic that some people dislike "data classes" because these are regular classes, not just for data, while others are proposing alternative names that emphasize the data container aspect. So "data classes" splits the difference, by referring to both data and classes.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Let's bikeshed about something else.<br clear="all"></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">--Guido van Rossum (<a href="http://python.org/~guido" target="_blank">python.org/~guido</a>)</div>
</div></div>