From: "Delaney, Timothy (Tim)" <tdelaney@avaya.com>
Sorry - this is related to my proposal that the following two bits of code behave the same:
class A(object): def f(self, *p, **kw): super.f(*p, **kw)
class A(object): def f(self, *p, **kw): super(*p, **kw)
But as has been pointed out, this creates an ambiguity with:
class A(object): def f(self, *p, **kw): super.__call__(*p, **kw)
so I want to see if I can resolve it.
A 'super' instance would be callable, without being able to access it's __call__ method (because super.__call__ would refer to the base class method of that name). But I find I really don't care. The only place where that would really matter IMO is if you want to find out if a 'super' instance is callable. Calling a base class __call__ method would not be ambiguous - the following two classes would work the same: class A(object): def __call__(self, *p, **kw): return super.__call__(*p, **kw) class A(object): def __call__(self, *p, **kw): return super(*p, **kw) So, I guess my question is whether the most common case of calling the base class method with the same name is worth having some further syntactic sugar to avoid repetition? I think it is, but that would be your call Guido. Cheers, Tim Delaney