On 4/19/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hmm, the reference to Dylan's next method (along with a few other comments in > this thread) makes me believe a magic autosuper() equivalent would really need > to be based on a thread-local context, rather than any kind of static code > analysis.
No, no, no! The current thread doesn't enter into it. It *must* be done through static code analysis. The inputs are the class and the instance. There's nothing that the thread can add. > An interesting point is that being able to call the "next method" for generic > functions has exactly the same problem. But thread-dependency doesn't enter into it. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
