On Wed, Jan 28, 2015, at 01:59, Ben Finney wrote: > You have no justification to claim that, and it's hostile and dismissive > to claim it so assertively.
Sorry about that - I was tired and had just read through the whole thread at once. > I'll freely admit to finding “'Foo' object” ambiguous. It can reasonably > be interpreted to mean either “a 'Foo' object” (⇒ “an object of class > 'Foo'”), or “the 'Foo' object” (⇒ “the object referred to by the name > 'Foo'”). The error message which inspired this thread needs improvement, > as I've said already. Most objects do not have an idea of their name, though. Assigning an object to a new name doesn't change the object, either. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
