[Python-Dev] New Super PEP (original) (raw)

Gustavo Carneiro gjcarneiro at gmail.com
Sun Apr 29 13:02:23 CEST 2007

On 29/04/07, James Y Knight <foom at fuhm.net> wrote:

On Apr 28, 2007, at 10:43 PM, Calvin Spealman wrote: > Abstract > ======== > > The PEP defines the proposal to enhance the super builtin to work > implicitly > upon the class within which it is used and upon the instance the > current > function was called on. The premise of the new super usage > suggested is as > follows: > > super.foo(1, 2) > > to replace the old: > > super(Foo, self).foo(1, 2) > > > Rationale > ========= > > The current usage of super requires an explicit passing of both the > class and > instance it must operate from, requiring a breaking of the DRY > (Don't Repeat > Yourself) rule. This hinders any change in class name, and is often > considered > a wart by many. This is only a halfway fix to DRY, and it really only fixes the less important half. The important problem with super is that it encourages people to write incorrect code by requiring that you explicitly specify an argument list.

Since calling super with any

arguments other than the exact same arguments you have received is nearly always wrong,

Erm. Excuse me, but are you saying this code is wrong?

class Rectangle: def init(self, width, height): self.width = width self.height = height

class Square: def init(self, side): Rectangle.init(self, side, side)

Or are you even saying this type of code is rare? I would disagree with both statements, therefore I also disagree with your recommendation.

-- Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro "The universe is always one step beyond logic." -- Frank Herbert -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20070429/5419126b/attachment.html

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list