Ian added the comment:
I agree that the use case is probably rare.
I agree that to someone intimately familiar with the "self-consistent rules" of
Python, the correctness of the C.f() approach is probably obvious.
However, your documentation says:
Static methods in Python are similar to those found in Java or C++.
I feel that it's a mistake to purposefully avoid saying where that similarity
ends. In those languages (and in many others), fully qualified function calls
from within the same class are redundant and border on "code smell". We agree
that this aspect of Python is not mentioned in the documentation, and we
disagree on whether it should be. For myself, even in the 7 years and
thousands of lines of Python since I opened this issue, I still don't find it
intuitive or obvious that a method would need to know the name of the class
that contains it. That doesn't make the language "wrong" in any way; it makes
the documentation incomplete for not addressing it.
The __class__.f() usage in Python 3 seems excellent. If that's the preferred
way to do it, then that might be a way to approach the documentation. "To call
one static method from another within the same class, as of Python 3 you may
use __class__.f() instead of C.f(). For Python 2.x, you must still use the
name of the class itself, C.f(), as if you were calling from outside the
class." (My wording is still less than ideal, but you get the idea.)
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue10438>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
