Micael Jarniac <mic...@jarniac.com> added the comment:
Well, at least for this example, to call `super().__init__()`, I'd need to provide it the two arguments it expects, `x` and `y`, otherwise it'd give an error: > TypeError: __init__() missing 2 required positional arguments: 'x' and 'y' If I try calling it as `super().__init__(self.x, self.y)`, I get an infinite recursion error: > RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded while calling a Python object That's mostly why I've chosen to call `__post_init__` instead. And if we're dealing with `InitVar`s, they can nicely be chained like so: >>> from dataclasses import dataclass, field, InitVar >>> >>> @dataclass ... class A: ... x: int ... y: InitVar[int] ... xy: int = field(init=False) ... ... def __post_init__(self, y: int) -> None: ... self.xy = self.x * y ... >>> @dataclass ... class B(A): ... m: int ... n: InitVar[int] ... mn: int = field(init=False) ... ... def __post_init__(self, y: int, n: int) -> None: ... super().__post_init__(y) ... self.mn = self.m * n ... >>> b = B(x=2, y=4, m=3, n=6) >>> b B(x=2, xy=8, m=3, mn=18) ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue44365> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
