On 3/22/07, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/22/07, Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In general. Too many things could fail without errors, so it wasn't > > obvious how to use it correctly. None of the articles I've read > > helped either. > > I've been thinking about writing an article that explains how to use > super(), so let's start here :) This is a long post that I'll probably > eventually copy-paste-and-edit into an article of some sort, when I get the > time. Please do comment, except with 'MI is insane' -- I already know that. > Nevertheless, I think MI has its uses.
I'm going to be blunt, and I apologize if I offend. In short, your article is no better than any of the others. TOOWTDI What you've done is list off various ways why multiple inheritance and super() can fail, and then provide a toolbox from which a programmer can cobble together a solution to fit their exact needs. It's not pythonic. What we need is a *single* style that can be applied consistently to 90+% of problems while still requiring minimal effort to read later. Using keyword arguments and consuming them is the best I've seen so far. Sure it's a little verbose, but the verbosity is repetitive and easy to tune out. It also requires the classes to cooperate. News flash: Python isn't C++ or Java. Python uses a shared __dict__ rather than private namespaces in each class. Python *always* requires the classes to cooperate. If you want to combine uncooperative classes you need to use delegation. I'm sure somebody could whip up a metaclass to automate it, especially with the new metaclass syntax, not to mention ABCs to say "I'm string-ish" when you're delegating str. -- Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
