April 5, 2022
3:41 p.m.
On 6/04/22 4:57 am, Eric Fahlgren wrote:
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 7:49 AM Greg Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz <mailto:greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz>> wrote:
It's only there now for backwards compatibility.
Not always. I have an example, where a method creates a closure that calls super, requiring the class/self pair as there isn't enough context for parameterless super.
Fair point, but you're still using it to keep track of the class defining the method concerned, not to target some other class in the MRO. BTW, it seems to me that such a closure should also participate in the magic behind argumentless super. Seems like it should be possible. -- Greg