On Tue, 2005-01-04 at 22:12 -0500, Bob Ippolito wrote: > If you have a class hierarchy where this is a problem, it's probably > pretty fragile to begin with, and you should think about making it > simpler. I agree with James's rant almost entirely, but I like super() anyway. I think it is an indication not of a new weakness of super(), but of a long-standing weakness of __init__. One approach I have taken in order to avoid copiously over-documenting every super() using class is to decouple different phases of initialization by making __init__ as simple as possible (setting a few attributes, resisting the temptation to calculate things), and then providing class methods like '.fromString' or '.forUnserialize' that create instances that have been completely constructed for a particular purpose. That way the signatures are much more likely to line up across inheritance hierarchies. Perhaps this should be a suggested "best practice" when using super() as well?
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