[Python-ideas] PEP 3155 - Qualified name for classes and functions

[Barry Warsaw]

On Nov 07, 2011, at 05:19 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:

>OTOH, qname will be easily found in search engine (one of my griefs with
>the “packaging” module name).

Are you sure about that?  I.e. have you tried it?

>-1 on these propositions: A dotted name or path includes the module name
>for me (or for things like packaging.util.resolve_name).  I’m less
>affirmative about “full name”; it could mean “full name in one module”,
>so that __module__ + __fullname__ == the fully qualified name.  This
>terminology is not terrific: I don’t think it would be good to have a
>distinction between “full name” (a.b) and “fully qualified name”
>(module.a.b).  I think “qualified name” and “fully qualified name” are
>better terms: “qualified” has IMO less assumptions than full (you ask
>yourself “in what way is it qualified?” and go to the docs, instead of
>thinking “ah, it’s the full name including the module” or “ah, it’s like
>__name__ but better, and without the module”), and “fully qualified”
>builds on “qualified”.
>
>(I’m trying to be constructive, not bikeshedding; tell me if I fail.)
>
>__qualname__ is less cryptic and not too long; __qualifiedname__ is even
>less cryptic.

"scoped" could also be used instead of "qualified".

-Barry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/attachments/20111107/cd110a03/attachment.pgp>