Felipe Almeida Lessa wrote: > $ pwd > /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages > $ grep -re klass . | wc -l > 274 > $ grep -re class_ . | wc -l > 897
How many of those "class_" instances are really just substrings of "__class__" and "class_name" and such? On my machine, I see a handful in the standard library, and _none_ in site-packages (which has only 1709 .py files, mind you). > For me that's enough. "class_" is used at least three times more than > "klass". Besides, as Scott pointed out, "class_" is prefered by the > guidelines too. Actually what he posted explicitly states that "cls" is preferred. Following that it says that one should considering appending _ if the name conflicts with a keyword (and one can assume it means "for all keywords other than class"). >>`cls`, at least, is more commonly used within >>Python itself (e.g., classmethods). > > Yes. cls wouldn't be a good choice. But class_ is. Or maybe even > css_class. But klass isn't. As has been pointed out, klass has a fairly established tradition of use. (I happen to agree with the PEP and use "cls" exclusively for such things, and do agree that "klass" is crude.) -Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
