Comment Comment by coder543 No. What else could it reasonably be named? Hard to imagine.The rule has always been intended to cover types that have another word in them but still choose to pointlessly repeat the package name.`uuid.UUIDGenerator` is a hypothetical example of the anti-pattern that would instead be better named as `uuid.Generator`. parent coder543 2 months ago
The rule has always been intended to cover types that have another word in them but still choose to pointlessly repeat the package name.
`uuid.UUIDGenerator` is a hypothetical example of the anti-pattern that would instead be better named as `uuid.Generator`.