[issue46175] Zero argument super() does not function properly inside generator expressions
Carlos Damazio added the comment: By explicitly sending a type and object to the super function, it should work as usual, like in the file that I've just sent. I've seen this behavior before, it's related to Python's module reload function, which returns a new reference to the reloaded module. This issue is not widely known though, should be documented. -- nosy: +carlosdamazio Added file: https://bugs.python.org/file50519/superbug-fixd.py ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46175> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue46175] Zero argument super() does not function properly inside generator expressions
Carlos Damazio added the comment: Normally, users assume it's safe to use `super` without explicit arguments, until an undefined behavior happens, such as now. The only thing that glances into this issue is the observation in the docs you've provided that omitting the second argument (self), `super` returns an unbounded object, which is a super object. I mean, there are 2 alternatives: this issue is related to a lower level implementation and it's another way to solve it (of which needs investigation of course) or state that it's required to provide such arguments in the docs. https://docs.python.org/3.9/library/functions.html#super In the newer docs, we are assuming that `super()` is the same as `super(cls, self)`, but clearly it's not. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46175> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue46175] Zero argument super() does not function properly inside generator expressions
Carlos Damazio added the comment: Josh: My mistake, I've seen a similar issue, then. And agreed, I think #2 is a great candidate since we don't need to re-design existing structures. I don't know a better option... yet. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46175> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue2756] urllib.request.add_header fails with existing unredirected_header
Carlos Damazio added the comment: This is the server for testing in 3.10. -- nosy: +carlosdamazio Added file: https://bugs.python.org/file50523/server310.py ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue2756> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue2756] urllib.request.add_header fails with existing unredirected_header
Carlos Damazio added the comment: And here's the code to reproduce the bug in 3.10. -- Added file: https://bugs.python.org/file50524/bug310.py ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue2756> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue22859] unittest.TestProgram.usageExit no longer invoked
Carlos Damazio added the comment: Well, to this issue, I'm going to put a PR to remove it and give it a chance for it to being reinstated if you folks want to. -- nosy: +carlosdamazio -dmzz ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue22859> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue46194] Wrong base class for transport returned by loop.create_datagram_endpoint()
Carlos Damazio added the comment: I think I have a fix for this, I opened a PR. Let me know if you have any questions. -- nosy: +carlosdamazio ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue46194> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue38522] Py_USING_MEMORY_DEBUGGER is referenced in docs but not present in code
Carlos Damazio added the comment: Opened a PR for this issue. It'll remove the mentions to the `Py_USING_MEMORY_DEBUGGER` since it'd been removed 5 years ago. -- nosy: +carlosdamazio ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue38522> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
