>>>>> "AM" == Alex Martelli <aleax@aleax.it> writes:
>> what Zope does AFAIK). Otherwise creating minor variations on
>> a class would be quite a pain -- you'd have to repeat all the
>> interfaces implemented by the base class; and what if a later
>> version of Super implements more interfaces?
AM> This is actually a difficult point. If I have to explicitly
AM> state all the interfaces of Super that I want to _exclude_,
AM> and Super adds some more interfaces tomorrow, then it's quite
AM> possible that my class is suddenly broken -- it doesn't
AM> guarantee the invariants that says it guarantees, any more --
AM> and I don't even know about it.
You'd need a way to explicitly state that you implement /none/ of the
interfaces of your superclass, and then explicitly add back the ones
you do implement.
-Barry
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4