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.