[Grok-dev] Re: "baseclass" or "ignore"?

[Martijn Faassen]

Brandon Craig Rhodes wrote:
> While reading template code, it occurred to me that:
> 
>     class MyClass(...):
>         grok.ignore()
> 
> is more readable than:
> 
>     class MyClass(...):
>         grok.baseclass()
> 
> which seems to communicate something one step removed from what the
> directive is really going to do.  I suppose I'm going to receive the
> objection that things are nice the way things are and that if clarity
> were our aim we would have to say: :-)
> 
>     class MyClass(...):
>         grok.dont_grok_this_class_but_still_grok_its_subclasses()
> 

grok.ignore() sounds like a reasonable name. Do we have cases where we 
want martian to ignore a class without it being a base class? If we do, 
that'd be a good argument for 'grok.ignore()'.

Regards,

Martijn