Message389340
This looks like a sensible idea to me. The safeguards to ensure that customized 'super' still works seem reasonable to me. I have to admit that I sometimes refrain from using super() where I should because of the expense, so this would be welcome.
I do wonder -- is two-arg super() important enough to support it at all? Maybe the code would be somewhat simpler if the special opcodes were only generated for zero-arg super() calls. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2021-03-22 20:49:58 | gvanrossum | set | recipients:
+ gvanrossum, rhettinger, Mark.Shannon, v2m, BTaskaya |
2021-03-22 20:49:58 | gvanrossum | set | messageid: <1616446198.17.0.75955255624.issue43563@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
2021-03-22 20:49:58 | gvanrossum | link | issue43563 messages |
2021-03-22 20:49:58 | gvanrossum | create | |
|