James> This is only a halfway fix to DRY, and it really only fixes the
James> less important half. The important problem with super is that it
James> encourages people to write incorrect code by requiring that you
James> explicitly specify an argument list. Since calling super with any
James> arguments other than the exact same arguments you have received
James> is nearly always wrong, requiring that the arglist be specified
James> is an attractive nuisance.
Since the language doesn't require that a subclassed method take the same
parameters as the base class method, you can't assume that it does. super()
should simply mean "call with no arguments".
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