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

[Antoine Pitrou]

Le jeudi 10 novembre 2011 à 11:38 +1000, Nick Coghlan a écrit :
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:00 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 10:24:18 +1000
> > Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> It seems to me that "implementation name" would work as a term for
> >> Antoine's PEP as well, since it's about providing enough information
> >> to locate the actual implementation of the class or function relative
> >> to the top level of the module.
> >
> > I don't really follow this reasoning. There is no other object than the
> > "actual implementation"; __name__ and __q[ual]name__ denote the same
> > thing. "Implementation name" sounds like a misnomer to me.
> 
> Yeah, on further reflection, I agree that the connotations suggesting
> a separate implementation object may be too strong for that to be a
> reasonable term. That's probably why I dropped it in the first place.
> 
> > If __qname__ is too elliptic, let's settle on __qualname__?
> 
> "q name" is easy to say, "qual name" is relatively hard to say - if
> we're going to abbreviate, it should be to something pronounceable.

This must depend where you come from. I have no problem pronouncing
"qualname" with a gross French accent, and I'm sure Victor would
understand me :-)

Regards

Antoine.