> I'd say NOT wanting to call an __init__ method of a superclass is a
> rather uncommon occurence. It's generally a huge error. So I think
> it's worth not accomodating that.
I will give you an example then where I am absolutely fine with calling
super().__init__ in all classes and describe why
>>class Magic:
>>magic_number = 42
>>def __init__(self):
>>A.magic_number = 0 # As soon as you look too deep into it all
>> the Magic vanishes
>
> What is A here? Did you mean something else?
Sorry for that. Yes, it should have been Magic (I renamed the class af
> Everything my idea has to offer really is just reasonable if you don’t have
> single inheritance only
I would like to correct myself immediately on that one: In the Pizza-example
(from yesterday as well) it would be possible to overwrite the default price of
the HawaiianPizza with the mergin
I realized that bypassing kwargs is probably the least important thing of this
idea - so if implemented it definitely had to get a better name. Just look at
the following example:
class Magic:
magic_number = 42
def __init__(self):
A.magic_number = 0 # As soon as
> If I understand correctly, the essence of your argument seems to be
> that you want be able to write a class A, and you want to be able to use that
> class EITHER as the top of an inheritance chain (i.e., have it inherit
> directly from object) OR in the middle of an inheritance chain (
> Right, which means that Pizza and Lasagna are not compatible classes
> in that way.
Okay, let me try it one final time with the original pizza example. Let’s
assume that your restaurant has a special offer on all Hawaiian Pizzas where
you can get all sizes for 10$. Now the only reasonable thi
Let me put it this way:
class A(object):
def __init__(self, a_value, **kwargs):
print("This is a value:", a_value)
super().__init__(**kwargs)
Which parameters does `A` take when being initialized?
Whenever you give any kwargs when directly instantiating `A` they
[Steven D'Aprano]
>obj = Aardvark(27, spam=3, eggs=5, cheese=True)
>
> So you look up help(Aardvark), and it tells you that the signature is
>
>Aardvark.__init__(self, foo)
>
> What the hell? If Aardvark.__init__ only takes a single argument
This is wrong! This would at some point down t
Hi!
***Disclaimer: I am relatively new to Python***
I propose to add some mechanism that can automatically collect everything
what would normally be collected by **kwargs in the __init__ method and
directly pass it through to the super().__init__ call without being
accessible in the __init__ itse
