On 9 Sep, 2013, at 23:18, Mark Shannon <m...@hotpy.org> wrote: > On 09/09/13 15:30, Ethan Furman wrote: >> On 07/30/2013 11:17 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote: >>> >>> And something I forgot to ask: is anyone willing to be the >>> BDFL-Delegate for >>> PEP 447? >> >> *Bump*. >> >> It would be nice if this could make into 3.4. >> > > IMO, there are some issues that need to be addressed before PEP 447 should be > accepted. > > 1. Is there even a problem at all, or is this just a bug in super? > Why doesn't super() respect the __getattribute__ method of the superclass?
Because __getattribute__ looks in the instance __dict__ before walking the MRO, while super does not. > > 2. Is this the best way to solve the problem (if there is a problem)? > Would a __super__ special method be sufficient and less intrusive. One reason for the __locallookup__ method is to make normal and super attribute lookup more simular, adding a __super__ special method would lead to code duplication: both __getattribute__ and __super__ would either contain simular code, or would call out to a shared method anyway. > > 3. Are the proposed semantics OK? > I think they are, but very low level changes such as these can have > unforeseen consequences. For example, PEP 3135 and issue 12370. > > 4. What is the performance impact. pybench really doesn't count as a > benchmark. What kind of benchmark would you like to see? BTW. I ran more than pybench, I also ran the part of the performance benchmark that worked on py3k at the time. Ronald _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
