Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: interactive help on the base object
Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2013 13:10:37 +1300
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <bghrnvFnpkpU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <mailman.3658.1386349412.18130.python-list@python.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net mNKrNl3U3GeEXCsrNyzWUAcsyCifXe4rcZpqJQuBbA8aIO2aH5
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YKfpbYq6tsf1kdgeWCgi68wGTQ0=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.5 (Macintosh/20050711)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
In-Reply-To: <mailman.3658.1386349412.18130.python-list@python.org>
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:61258

Mark Lawrence wrote:
> Is it just me, or is this basically useless?
> 
> class object
>  |  The most base type

It's also a somewhat strange construction from an English language
point of view. To make sense, it requires interpreting the word
"base" as an adjective, and when used that way it has connotations
of something to turn your nose up at. I'm assuming that's not the
impression we want to give!

Maybe something like "The ultimate base class of all classes"
would be better.

-- 
Greg