[Python-3000] Fixing super anyone?
Guido van Rossum
guido at python.org
Tue Apr 24 00:38:21 CEST 2007
On 4/23/07, Adam Olsen <rhamph at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/23/07, Phillip J. Eby <pje at telecommunity.com> wrote:
> > But I can't say I particularly like this idea, compared to "super.foo" or
> > even "super(self).foo". In fact, the latter invocation doesn't even
> > require a keyword -- it just means the compiler needs to include a cell
> > variable for the current class whenever it thinks you might be using super().
> +1 on super(self).foo. It's SomeLongClassName we want to get rid of, not self.
> As a bonus, super() and super(cls) have obvious semantics.
At least +0 from me too.
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
More information about the Python-3000