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

Calvin Spealman ironfroggy at gmail.com
Sun Apr 29 21:29:10 CEST 2007

On 4/29/07, Collin Winter <collinw at gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/29/07, Calvin Spealman <ironfroggy at gmail.com> wrote: > 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)

Now that I think about it, your proposal seems to address only one of super()'s three forms (http://docs.python.org/lib/built-in-funcs.html#l2h-72): 1. super(type) 2. super(type, instance) 3. super(type, type) If your intention is to remove the first and third forms from the language, please justify their removal in your PEP, including your proposed work-around for their use-cases.

The first is not removed, but actually utilized by the proposal itself. That is what the super attributes are: super objects associated only with a type, but no instance.

As for the third form, I wasn't even aware of it, I thought. I didn't consider the cases like how super is used in new methods, but I tested it with the reference implementation, and it works just fine. If there are any cases I'm missing, there is no reason not to support it.

-- Read my blog! I depend on your acceptance of my opinion! I am interesting! http://ironfroggy-code.blogspot.com/

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list