On Feb 10, 4:29 am, "Gabriel Genellina" > AFAIK, all facts appearing in said article are still true (except for 3.x > which uses a shorter form). If super usage had been clearly documented in > the first place, this had not happened. > Perhaps you could point us to some resource explaining how is super > supposed to be used correctly? > And of those giving explanations in python-dev, nobody cared to add a > single word to the Python documentation for years. > > > Honestly, I don't understand how this thing got so much out of > > control. If anyone starts an intelligent question or remark about > > super, this essay is thrown in no matter what. Anyone can explain why? > > Because for a very loooooong time (seven years, 2001-2008) super was > almost undocumented. The Library Reference -before release 2.6- only had a > short paragraph, the online documentation referred (and still does) to the > original essay by Guido introducing descriptors, which is inaccurate and > outdated, and then the "... harmful" article was the only source of > information available.
All right. This is way I made the effort of writing a comprehensive collection of all the tricky points about super I knew: http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=236275 http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=236278 http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=237121 Also see this thread on python-dev about the issue of super documentation: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/python/dev/673833 Michele Simionato -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
