Chris Angelico writes:
And is it still based on the fundamental assumption that super() calls THE parent class? what are you even talking about?
I don't have the time to read that long a post. Then just read the list of 4-5 features i describe as features of current MRO + super, at the top of my post, and tell me if you agree with this analysis or not.
If the proposals are actually independent, maybe propose them one at a time? a lot of features are currently rendered by super + MRO, in a very intricate way. I'm not opposed to dedicating their own posts to each proposal, but i already tried to dedicate this post only to method resolution and super proxy features. You were amongst the many participants that raised complaints about those other features such as dependency injection for example, which is understandable. This leads us to such a lenghty post. Not much i can do about this, super and MRO have way too many responsibilities today. Unless you're ready to start over the discussion on my proposal on method resolution, under the explicit assumption that other features provided by super + MRO today are rendered in their own independant way, which would be the topic of another proposal.
I think you were the one that requested real life code exemples, there's a dedicated sections, i guess you could read it too