Patches item #1727209, was opened at 2007-05-28 22:30
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gvanrossum
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1727209&group_id=5470
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Core (C code)
Group: Python 3000
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Assigned to: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Summary: First steps towards new super (PEP 367)
Initial Comment:
A half-assed start of an implementation for super.
This is lacking parser support; instead, for now, you have to have a
keyword-only argument named super, e.g.
def foo(self, arg, *, super):
return super.foo(arg) + 1
Note that the first version changes method lookup for bound method lookup but
not yet for unbound method lookup. E.g. if f is defined in class B, and class
C derives from B, C().f returns a bound method object whose im_class attribute
is set to B (as opposed to C as it used to be) but C.f returns an unbound
method object with im_class set to C. (I hope to this in a later version.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-06-06 17:00
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
Sorry, forgot to add test_super.py to the patch.
File Added: super2.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-06-06 16:57
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
OK, here's today's final version (I hope). This fixes test_scope.py
(wasn't too hard after all) and updates the docstring for super().
Question to all: is writing super() acceptable?
File Added: super2.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-06-06 16:01
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
Here's a better version that lets you use super() as a shorthand for
super(__class__, <firstarg>). test_scope.py still fails though.
File Added: super2.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-06-06 14:53
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
I'm starting a new series of patches, super2.diff. These use a completely
different tack, inserting a cell variable __class__ into the class shared
by all the methods and initialized to the class after it's constructed.
Right now, this allows us to write super(__class__, self).method() -- I
want to evolve it so that eventually you can write super.method() and super
will do the lookup of __class__ and the first argument itself.
There's one failing test, testFreeVarInMethod in test_scope.py. This
seems significant but I want to upload a checkpoint first.
File Added: super2.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-05-31 19:00
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
This breaks all class methods (as Phillip Eby pointed out):
class C:
@classmethod
def cm(cls): return cls.__name__
class D(C): pass
print(D.cm(), D().cm())
This should print "D D" but with the patch it prints "C C".
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-05-31 07:45
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
Oops, a last-minute change didn't work out. This version is better.
File Added: super.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-05-31 07:24
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
Here's a version that modifies the grammar so 'super' is a keyword. The
compiler automatically inserts a 'super' keyword-only argument into a
function's signature when the 'super' keyword is used in its body. It
works!
This requires the p3yk branch at -r55692 or newer.
File Added: super.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-05-29 02:08
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
Here's a new version. Forget about sup.py, the demos are now in
Lib/test/test_super.py.
Only a few tests fail due to the semantic change (about six files have 1-2
failures each). I think this is acceptable.
File Added: super.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-05-28 23:23
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
And a new sup.py example demonstrating that the new patch works.
File Added: sup.py
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-05-28 23:22
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
Here's a new version of the patch where C.f.im_class (in the above
example) correctly returns B.
File Added: super.diff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum)
Date: 2007-05-28 22:31
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=6380
Originator: YES
Here is sup.py, a small demo of how this is supposed to work.
File Added: sup.py
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1727209&group_id=5470
_______________________________________________
Patches mailing list
Patches@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/patches
