A RetroSearch Logo

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

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-May/119551.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 3135 (new super()) __class__ references broken in 3.3

[Python-Dev] PEP 3135 (new super()) __class__ references broken in 3.3 [Python-Dev] PEP 3135 (new super()) __class__ references broken in 3.3Benjamin Peterson benjamin at python.org
Sun May 20 22:28:43 CEST 2012
2012/5/20 Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com>:
> PEP 3135 defines the new zero-argument form of super() as implicitly
> equivalent to super(__class__, <first argument>), and up until 3.2 has
> behaved accordingly: if you accessed __class__ from inside a method,
> you would receive a reference to the lexically containing class.

I don't understand why PEP 3135 cares how it's implemented. It's silly
enough that you can get the class by "using" super (even just
referencing the name). Thus that you can get __class__ reeks of more
an implementation detail than a feature to me.

-- 
Regards,
Benjamin
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list

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