On Feb 14, 7:15 pm, rantingrick <rantingr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 14, 11:55 am, Michael Sparks <spark...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It can be broken if someone tries to use the class as is - that is > > treating the class as a model - to drive a display of the ship. If > > it was written using super() then that wouldn't be a problem. > > > For example, I could write a display mixin that I'd like to use like > > this: > > [snip: miles of code not formatted for 79 chars!]
Core code recopied into a pastebin instead, if that's your only problem. * http://pastebin.com/nuaafqSE I hardly call 87 lines of code "miles of code" though myself. I call it a relatively trivial example aimed at showing the benefit of using super() in your code rather than hard coding brittle fragility into your code. > That was a nice long winded example of how to break code by using it > in an improper manner. No, it was a thought out example of how writing code slightly differently from how you do now can result in something more practical, reusable, extendable, and maintainable. I was hoping to educate you as to why one approach *might* be considered better than another. Deriding is as you do completely misses the point, sadly. Michael. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
