[Python-3000] PEP 367: New Super

Tim Delaney tcdelaney at optusnet.com.au
Sun May 20 08:44:03 CEST 2007

Tim Delaney wrote:
> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>> At 05:23 PM 5/14/2007 +1000, Tim Delaney wrote:
>>> Determining the class object to use
>>> '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
>>> The exact mechanism for associating the method with the defining
>>> class is not
>>> specified in this PEP, and should be chosen for maximum performance.
>>> For CPython, it is suggested that the class instance be held in a
>>> C-level variable
>>> on the function object which is bound to one of ``NULL`` (not part
>>> of a class),
>>> ``Py_None`` (static method) or a class object (instance or class
>>> method).
>> Another open issue here: is the decorated class used, or the
>> undecorated class?
> Sorry I've taken so long to get back to you about this - had email
> problems.
> I'm not sure what you're getting at here - are you referring to the
> decorators for classes PEP? In that case, the decorator is applied
> after the class is constructed, so it would be the undecorated class.
> Are class decorators going to update the MRO? I see nothing about
> that in PEP 3129, so using the undecorated class would match the
> current super(cls, self) behaviour.

Duh - I'm an idiot. Of course, the current behaviour uses name lookup, so it 
would use the decorated class.

So the question is, should the method store the class, or the name? Looking 
up by name could pick up a totally unrelated class, but storing the 
undecorated class could miss something important in the decoration.

Tim Delaney 

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list