On Fri, 27 May 2011 08:31:40 -0700, sturlamolden wrote: > On 27 Mai, 17:05, Duncan Booth <duncan.bo...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Oops. There's a reason why Python 2 requires you to be explicit about >> the class; you simply cannot work it out automatically at run time. >> Python 3 fixes this by working it out at compile time, but for Python 2 >> there is no way around it. > > Then it should be a keyword, not a function.
Why? The fault is not that super is a function, or that you monkey- patched it, or that you used a private function to do that monkey- patching. The fault was that you made a common, but silly, mistake when reasoning about type(self) inside a class. I made the same mistake: assume that type(self) will always be the same class as that the method is defined in. But of course it won't be. With the luxury of hindsight, it is a silly mistake to make, but I promise you that you're not the first, and won't be the last, to make it. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
