On Tue, 5 Apr 2022 at 07:21, malmiteria <martin.mi...@ensc.fr> wrote: > > Just for everyone reading this, I'm writing this one only for Chris Angelico. > As much as some others here have been heating up during the discussion, which > is understandable, i believe most of you were willing / able to provide a > fair discussion, and still are, which shows maturity, and is something i > respect. > This is something i believe you, Chris Angelico, are not capable of.
If you meant it only for me, you could have sent it privately. > Chris Angelico writes: > > malmiteria writes: > > > super(A, self) does not proxy to A, but to the first *after* A in MRO > > > order. > > When you call super(A, self), you are expecting to call A's method. > > At this point this is cognitive dissonance. > Are you not willing / able to understand what i am saying to you? I completely understand what you are saying. I disagree with the underlying assumptions. > I do not expect super(A, self) to call A's method. I very much know it > doesn't. As i am *very explicitely* telling you in those quotes > What i am saying is that *if* super(A, self) *were* to call A's method, that > would be a simpler API. > If you understand that this is my proposal, and not my understanding of > today's super, then for the love of god, address my proposal. I understand that this is your proposal and I think it is a bad proposal. That is why I have kept saying what I have been saying. > Read that again, but slowly. > > Read it again. > > Once more. > > Do you still believe i think super(A, self) calls A's method? > Whatever your answer here, read that again. > > Again. > > I do not believe super(A, self) calls A's method. > > Read that again. > > Are you starting to understand? Alright, enough, I get the idea. You do not understand what my point is, and you think that I don't understand yours. There's not a lot of point discussing further. > You do not seem to understand the current links between super and MRO Excuse me? > Is the API i propose better than today's API? No, it is not. > I genuinly want a discussion here. Really? Then start by understanding what everyone has been saying: that you do not have to use super for everything. You're trying to warp super to fit your expectations, instead of understanding what it does and doesn't do. I am trying my hardest to have a discussion with you, instead of what I probably should have done several posts ago and simply deleted your emails and moved on with my life. But since you are clearly not returning the favour, I am now done. Good luck with your proposal, maybe you can team up with jmf and make a new version of Python that fixes all the problems in it. ChrisA _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/3I7LTXCM7ZIDWCOI6DSSKCTAW6G37VVM/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
