On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 12:41 am, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 2:31 AM, Steven D'Aprano > <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: >> On Monday 04 July 2016 18:34, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote: >> >>> On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 7:58:07 PM UTC+12, dieter wrote: >>>> --> "type(obj)" or "obj.__class__" (there are small differences) >>>> give you the type/class of "obj". >>> >>> When would it not be the same? >> >> >> class X(object): >> def __getattribute__(self, name): >> if __name__ == '__class__': >> return int >> return super().__getattribute__(name) > > Did you actually test that?
Er, no, because if I had, I would have discovered the silly typo: __name__ instead of name, which screws up the whole thing... Trying again: py> class X(object): ... def __getattribute__(self, name): ... if name == '__class__': # NOTE SPELLING ... return int ... return super().__getattribute__(name) ... py> x = X() py> x.__class__ <class 'int'> [...] > Certain attributes like __class__ and __dict__ are special. Indeed they are, but __class__ is not *that* special :-) -- Steven “Cheer up,” they said, “things could be worse.” So I cheered up, and sure enough, things got worse. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
