RetroSearch Browse

Thu May 1 10:42:19 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-May/078981.html

Hi,

Guido van Rossum <guido <at> python.org> writes:

> The staticmethod thing isn't new; that's also the case in 2.x.
staticmethod hasn't changed, method has.  In the past Class.method gave
you a unbound method, now you get a function back as if it was a static
method.

> The super() thing is a case of practicality beats purity. Note that
> you pay a small but measurable cost for the implicit __class__ (it's
> implemented as a "cell variable", the same mechanism used for nested
> scopes) so we wouldn't want to introduce it unless it is used.
I do agree that super() is a lot easier to work with than regular way to
call it.  But the fact that it breaks if i do `_super = super` or that
it's impossible to emulate it from within Python.

Regards,
Armin

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-May/078981.html below:

[Python-Dev] Problems with the new super()