On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:15:10 -0500
Benjamin Peterson <benjamin at python.org> wrote:
> 2011/4/14 Ricardo Kirkner <ricardokirkner at gmail.com>:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I recently stumbled upon an issue with a class in the mro chain not
> > calling super, therefore breaking the chain (ie, further base classes
> > along the chain didn't get called).
> > I understand it is currently a requirement that all classes that are
> > part of the mro chain behave and always call super. My question is,
> > shouldn't/wouldn't it be better,
> > if python took ownership of that part, and ensured all classes get
> > called, even if some class misbehaved?
> >
> > For example, if using a stack-like structure, pushing super calls and
> > popping until the stack was empty, couldn't this restriction be
> > removed?
>
> No. See line 2 of the Zen of Python.
You could have quoted it explicitly :)
FWIW, line 2 is:
Explicit is better than implicit.
Regards
Antoine.
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