It is a sound engineering practice to avoid using keywords as names even when the language’s parser will let you get away with it. For consistency, some developers (myself included) will avoid words like `class` and `module` even when embedded in a longer name, such as `user_class`.

I don’t use `klass`, but that’s because I’m a Java Bigco cubicle-dweller fraudulently passing himself off as a Rubyist and Javascripter. I prefer `clazz` in keeping with Sun examples.

class is a keyword.

The word doesn't seem to be used by itself however - the code in the article contains "user_klass" and "log_klass", which can presumably be spelled correctly without causing an issue?

Yeah, it can, but perhaps you develop a habit for it whenever creating variable names, so there is some visual harmony between klass, old_klass, klass_dismissed, etc. when reading the code.

The k is a useful visual hint, even when not necessary.

I think perlgeek was referring to the use of user_klass and log_klass.

Not in the way its used in his samples.

I use `cls` in my ruby code, as I do in other langs; I think `klass` is unsightly.

... to a non-German?

... even to a German. It's Klasse, not "klass" (the ending e and the capital K are of some importance here)

Ah, correct, thanks :-)

klass is used in meta programming as a way to control scope.

The author of the code must like German. He used "Matz" as a parameter, a German name, and klass = class in German.

Matz is short for Yukihiro Matsumoto, the creator of Ruby.

Matz is neither a common german name (I've never encountered it) nor is class "klass" in german. It's "Klasse". Maybe you just missed out an "e" on the name aswell? There is "Matze" which would be a short version of "Mathias".