Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If a function is named 'super' and operates on >classes, it's a pretty strong implication that it's about >superclasses.
But it doesn't (under normal circumstances) operate on classes. It operates on an *instance*. And what you get back is a (proxy to) a superclass/ancestor of the *instance*. (And in the super(A, B) case, you get a superclass/ancestor of *B*. As has just been said somewhere very near here, what is misleading is the prominence of A, which isn't really the most important class involved.) -- \S -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.chaos.org.uk/~sion/ "Frankly I have no feelings towards penguins one way or the other" -- Arthur C. Clarke her nu becomeþ se bera eadward ofdun hlæddre heafdes bæce bump bump bump
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
