PEP 3135 defines the new zero-argument form of super() as implicitly equivalent to super(__class__, <first argument>), and up until 3.2 has behaved accordingly: if you accessed __class__ from inside a method, you would receive a reference to the lexically containing class.
In 3.3, that currently doesn't work: you get NameError instead (http://bugs.python.org/issue14857) While the 3.2 behaviour wasn't documented in the language reference, it's *definitely* documented in PEP 3135 (and my recent updates to the 3.3 version of the metaclass docs were written accordingly - that's how I discovered the problem) The error in the alpha releases appears to be a consequence of the attempt to fix a problem where the special treatment of __class__ meant that you couldn't properly set the __class__ attribute of the class itself in the class body (see http://bugs.python.org/issue12370). The fact that patch went in without causing a test failure means that this aspect of PEP 3135 has no explicit tests - it was only tested indirectly through the zero-argument super() construct. What I plan to do: 1. Revert the previous fix for #12370 2. Add tests for direct access to __class__ from methods 3. Create a *new* fix for #12370 that only affects the class scope, not the method bodies (this will be harder than the previous fix which affected the resolution of __class__ *everywhere* in the class body). Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
