Jan Kaliszewski <z...@kaliszewski.net> added the comment:
Sure. But don't you think there should be ``.__get__(a, type(a))`` rather than ``.__get__(a, A)``? Then the whole statement would be true regardless of whether A is the actual type of a, or only a superclass of the type of a. That would also be more consistent with the second point of the description, i.e., the one about *Instance Binding* (where we have ``type(a).__dict__['x'].__get__(a, type(a))``). Also, I believe that ``type(a).__mro__`` would be more consistent (than ``a.__class__.mro``) with that point. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue20751> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
