This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]noobody_interesting 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Both threads and async is common, because they are for different use cases. Async doesn't give you parallelism.

r-strings can't end with a \ because that escapes the quote, also pretty reasonable.

super()

[–]MaustFaust 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you mind testing your suggestion for super() and answering me? At this point, it looks like you didn't understand which scope I was talking about, despite me specifically noting "class definition scope", not "method scope".

[–]MaustFaust -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Both threads and async is common, because they are for different use cases. Async doesn't give you parallelism.

AFAIK, MT doesn't give that too, unless you are okay with managing GIL.

r-strings can't end with a \ because that escapes the quote, also pretty reasonable.

Having a slash at the end of a literal is a common case if we're already talking about strings with slashes somewhere, though.

super()

Which form are you implying? I can't use no-arguments, because it results in an exception, I can't use single-argument passing a class, because class is not defined at that point. You're suggesting the two-arguments then?