On 4/29/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 4/29/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip] > > I still wasn't really aware of any alternative suggestions that need > > to be included in this. > > Here are two off the top of my head: > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-April/006805.html > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-April/006811.html > > More generally, you're ignoring all the proposals along the line of > "let's fix the super type without making it a keyword". > > Collin Winter >
I'll add both of these, but neither had much support in the original thread. Also, I don't see that I'm ignoring anything along the line of "let's fix the super type without making it a keyword", because I am not advocating it become an actual keyword. I was always under the impression that was never meant literally. We have no where else where a keyword looks like an object. At the absolutely most I could almost see how super may become a constant, a'la None, in 3.0, but never a keyword. -- Read my blog! I depend on your acceptance of my opinion! I am interesting! http://ironfroggy-code.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ 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
