[Python-Dev] New Super PEP

[Collin Winter]

On 4/29/07, Calvin Spealman <ironfroggy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/29/07, Collin Winter <collinw at gmail.com> wrote:
> > What if the instance isn't called "self"? PEP 3099 states that "self
> > will not become implicit"; it's talking about method signatures, but I
> > think that dictum applies equally well in this case.
>
> I don't use the name self. I use whatever the first argument name is,
> found by this line of python code:
>
>     instance_name = calling_frame.f_code.co_varnames[0]

So I can't use super with anything but the method's invocant? That
seems arbitrary.

> > Also, it's my understanding that not all Python implementations have
> > an easy analogue to CPython's frames; have you given any thought to
> > whether and how PyPy, IronPython, Jython, etc, will implement this?
>
> I'll bring this up for input from PyPy and IronPython people, but I
> don't know any Jython people. Are we yet letting the alternative
> implementations influence so strongly what we do in CPython? I'm not
> saying "screw them", just pointing out that there is always a way to
> implement anything, and if its some trouble for them, well, 2.6 or 3.0
> targetting is far down the road for any of them yet.

It's a smell test: if a given proposal is unduly difficult for
anything but CPython to implement, it's probably a bad idea. The
language shouldn't go down the Perl 5 road, where python (the C
interpreter) becomes the only thing that can implement Python (the
language).

Collin Winter