Question

class A(object):
    def __init__(self, a, b, c):
        #super(A, self).__init__()
        super(self.__class__, self).__init__()


class B(A):
    def __init__(self, b, c):
        print super(B, self)
        print super(self.__class__, self)
        #super(B, self).__init__(1, b, c)
        super(self.__class__, self).__init__(1, b, c)

class C(B):
    def __init__(self, c):
        #super(C, self).__init__(2, c)
        super(self.__class__, self).__init__(2, c)
C(3)

In the above code, the commented out __init__ calls appear to the be the commonly accepted “smart” way to do super class initialization. However in the event that the class hierarchy is likely to change, I have been using the uncommented form, until recently.

It appears that in the call to the super constructor for B in the above hierarchy, that B.__init__ is called again, self.__class__ is actually C, not B as I had always assumed.

Is there some way in Python-2.x that I can maintain proper MRO (with respect to initializing all parent classes in the correct order) when calling super constructors while not naming the current class (the B in in super(B, self).__init__(1, b, c))?

Answer 1

Short answer: no, there’s no way to implicitly invoke the right __init__ with the right arguments of the right parent class in Python 2.x.

Incidentally, the code as shown here is incorrect: if you use super().__init__, then all classes in your hierarchy must have the same signature in their __init__ methods. Otherwise your code can stop working if you introduce a new subclass that uses multiple inheritance.

See http://fuhm.net/super-harmful/ for a longer description of the issue (with pictures).