What is the semantics meaning of 'object'?

[Roy Smith]

In article <51c74373$0$29999$c3e8da3$5496439d at news.astraweb.com>,
 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info> wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 12:04:35 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> > <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 11:18:41 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
> >>
> >>> Incidentally, although super() is useful, it's not perfect, and this
> >>> is one of my grievances with it: that a user can, based upon the name,
> >>> draw an inaccurate assumption about what it does without reading or
> >>> fully understanding the documentation on it, which might then result
> >>> in misusing it.
> >>
> >> Wait a second... are you saying that the Python developers created an
> >> advanced language feature relating to multiple inheritance, one of the
> >> most complex OOP concepts around, so difficult that most other
> >> languages simply prohibit it completely, and it wasn't instantly and
> >> correctly intuited by every single programmer based only on the name?
> >> Oh my stars, somebody call Ranting Rick, he needs to write a PyWart
> >> post to expose this scandal!!!
> > 
> > Mostly I'm saying that super() is badly named.
> 
> 
> What else would you call a function that does lookups on the current 
> object's superclasses?

Well, mro_lookup() would have been a better choice.  Super() has an 
obvious meaning, which just happens to be wrong.