RetroSearch Browse

Fri Apr 15 03:45:37 CEST 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110721.html

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 12:58:14 +1200, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
> P.J. Eby wrote:
> 
> > It's perfectly sensible and useful for there to be classes that 
> > intentionally fail to call super(), and yet have a subclass that wants 
> > to use super().
> 
> One such case is where someone is using super() in a
> single-inheritance environment as a way of not having to
> write the base class name explicitly into calls to base
> methods. (I wouldn't recommend using super() that way
> myself, but some people do.) In that situation, any failure
> to call super() is almost certainly deliberate.

Why not?  It seems more useful than using it for chaining,
especially given the compiler hack in Python3.

--
R. David Murray           http://www.bitdance.com

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-April/110721.html below:

[Python-Dev] python and super