Steven D'Aprano writes:
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 10:18:05PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
malmiteria writes:
If O1 and O2 are refactored into N1(GP) and N2(GP) the MRO as it was before refactoring was essentially N1, GP, N2, GP, as what was O1 before refactoring is equivalent to N1, GP after refactoring. After refactoring, the MRO is now N1, N2, GP. Which do behave differently, in general.
Nobody denies that.
I denied the first part, and still do.
I meant "nobody denies that behavior under [N1, GP, N2] may differ from that under [N1, N2, GP]". I'm sure you don't deny that. The point of malmiteria's "essentially", I assumed, was that the sequences were representative search orders through the program text, or something like that. Not MROs, despite what was written there. It's usually helpful to assume that if you parse someone's statement as nonsense, then probably you parsed it wrong.