Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #6414

Re: Python's super() considered super!

Show all headers | View raw

Duncan Booth wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> 
>> I was thrilled to learn a new trick, popping keyword arguments before 
>> calling super, and wondered why I hadn't thought of that myself. How on 
>> earth did I fail to realise that a kwarg dict was mutable and therefore 
>> you can remove keyword args, or inject new ones in?
>>
> Probably because most of the time it is better to avoid mutating kwargs. 
> Instead of popping an argument you simply declare it as a named argument in 
> the method signature. Instead of injecting new ones you can pass them as 
> named arguments.
> 
> 
> def foo(x=None, **kwargs):
> 	bar(y=2, **kwargs)
> 
> 	
> def bar(**kwargs):
> 	print(kwargs)
> 
>>>> foo(x=1, z=3)
> {'y': 2, 'z': 3}
>>>> foo(x=1, y=2, z=3)
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "<pyshell#8>", line 1, in <module>
>     foo(x=1, y=2, z=3)
>   File "<pyshell#4>", line 2, in foo
>     bar(y=2, **kwargs)
> TypeError: bar() got multiple values for keyword argument 'y'

And the above error is exactly why you don't want to use named arguments 
in MI -- because you don't know in what order the methods will be 
called, you cannot know which named arguments to supply to the method 
that super() will call next.

~Ethan~

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Python's super() considered super! Raymond Hettinger <python@rcn.com> - 2011-05-26 09:31 -0700
  Re: Python's super() considered super! Raymond Hettinger <python@rcn.com> - 2011-05-26 09:39 -0700
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Dotan Cohen <dotancohen@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 21:13 +0300
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 12:38 -0600
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Dotan Cohen <dotancohen@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 21:56 +0300
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-05-26 16:15 -0400
  Re: Python's super() considered super! Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-05-27 11:39 +1000
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Raymond Hettinger <python@rcn.com> - 2011-05-27 00:16 -0700
      Re: Python's super() considered super! Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-05-27 18:49 +1000
        Re: Python's super() considered super! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-27 10:37 +0000
          Re: Python's super() considered super! Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-27 10:53 +0000
            Re: Python's super() considered super! Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-27 10:42 -0700
              Re: Python's super() considered super! Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-30 09:18 +0000
    RE: Python's super() considered super! "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmchase.com> - 2011-05-27 14:10 -0400
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-28 04:40 +1000
  Re: Python's super() considered super! sturlamolden <sturlamolden@yahoo.no> - 2011-05-27 07:27 -0700
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Mel <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2011-05-27 10:33 -0400
      Re: Python's super() considered super! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-27 14:49 +0000
        Re: Python's super() considered super! harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> - 2011-05-27 10:07 -0500
    Re: Python's super() considered super! Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-27 15:05 +0000
      Re: Python's super() considered super! sturlamolden <sturlamolden@yahoo.no> - 2011-05-27 08:24 -0700
      Re: Python's super() considered super! sturlamolden <sturlamolden@yahoo.no> - 2011-05-27 08:31 -0700
        Re: Python's super() considered super! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-27 16:06 +0000
          Re: Python's super() considered super! Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2011-05-27 23:49 +0200
            Re: Python's super() considered super! sturlamolden <sturlamolden@yahoo.no> - 2011-05-27 16:57 -0700
              Re: Python's super() considered super! Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2011-05-28 07:29 +0200
          Re: Python's super() considered super! sturlamolden <sturlamolden@yahoo.no> - 2011-05-27 17:04 -0700
      Re: Python's super() considered super! Ryan Kelly <ryan@rfk.id.au> - 2011-05-28 09:57 +1000
    Re: Python's super() considered super! sturlamolden <sturlamolden@yahoo.no> - 2011-05-27 08:11 -0700
  Re: Python's super() considered super! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-05-27 12:31 -0600
  Re: Python's super() considered super! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-28 04:46 +1000
    Re: Python's super() considered super! John Nagle <nagle@animats.com> - 2011-05-27 13:47 -0700
  Re: Python's super() considered super! Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-27 15:24 -0700

csiph-web