[Python-3000] [Python-Dev] PEP 367: New Super

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Sun May 27 14:50:47 CEST 2007

On 5/27/07, Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > The bound method object isn't stored in the class -- it's created by
> > the "C.method" or "inst.method" getattr operation. I don't see how
> > this would introduce a cycle.
> >
> >> If we store the class, we can store it as a weakref - the when the
> >> super object is created, a strong reference to the class exists.
> We need to create some relationship between the unbound method and the
> class. So the class has a reference to the unbound method, and the unbound
> method has a reference to the class, thus creating a cycle. Bound methods
> don't come into it - it's the unbound method that's the problem.

Still wrong, I think. The unbound method object *also* isn't stored in
the class. It's returned by the C.method operation. Compare C.method
(which returns an unbound method) to C.__dict__['method'] (which
returns the actual function object stored in the class).

> > Since class and type are synonym (as you say) having both im_class and
> > im_type would be a bad idea.
> I'm struggling to think of another, not too complicated name that conveys
> the same information.

Keep trying. im_type is not acceptable. :-)

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list