On Apr 28, 2007, at 10:43 PM, Calvin Spealman wrote: > Abstract > ======== > > The PEP defines the proposal to enhance the super builtin to work > implicitly > upon the class within which it is used and upon the instance the > current > function was called on. The premise of the new super usage > suggested is as > follows: > > super.foo(1, 2) > > to replace the old: > > super(Foo, self).foo(1, 2) > > > Rationale > ========= > > The current usage of super requires an explicit passing of both the > class and > instance it must operate from, requiring a breaking of the DRY > (Don't Repeat > Yourself) rule. This hinders any change in class name, and is often > considered > a wart by many. This is only a halfway fix to DRY, and it really only fixes the less important half. The important problem with super is that it encourages people to write incorrect code by requiring that you explicitly specify an argument list. Since calling super with any arguments other than the exact same arguments you have received is nearly always wrong, requiring that the arglist be specified is an attractive nuisance. Now, I'm no syntax designer, but, just being able to say "super()" seems nice to me. (but don't get too hung up on that spelling, the concept of not having to repeat the arglist is the important point.) James
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