On Sep 19, 3:41 pm, Michele Simionato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 19, 3:22 pm, Sion Arrowsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > 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.) > > Happily A (and B too) will become invisible in Python 3000. > > Michele Simionato
This is great news! Since it is for Py3K it seems clear to me that super should be a keyword as well (but historically I'm not the best at channeling Guido ;-) -- bjorn -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
