Arnaud Delobelle wrote:
Self being explicit makes it less selfish :) To illustrate, I like that you can do:
class Foo(str): def mybar(self): class Bar(str): def madeby(me): return "I am %s and I was made by %s" % (me, self) return Bar
foo=Foo("foo") #bar=foo.mybar() # typo Bar=foo.mybar() bar=Bar("bar") print bar.madeby()
I am bar and I was made by foo
Ah, I see. If self were passed implicitly, you would need to make a Bar.__init__ that received and stored the outer self. I think I'd call this a third uncommon case. Outside functional idioms, common is usually flat.
This depends on 'self' being explicit and is not related to super. I didn't know about implicit super, it's probably great but my initial reaction is that I don't like it :(
Why not:
class Foo: @with_super def bar(super, self, x, y): super.bar(x, y) ...
Probably because it's way too common to require a decorator for it. Users would have to make "always use @with_super" into a coding habit. (Sort of like "self" actually.) It'd also be yet another thing to keep in mind while reading code: did this method use @with_super or not?
Neil