__init__ not a "constructor" ?

[Alex Martelli]

"Rainer Deyke" <root at rainerdeyke.com> wrote in message
news:114e7.30334$c8.9974672 at news1.denver1.co.home.com...
    ...
> > class A:
> >     def __init__(self, *args):
> >         # do stuff
> >
> > ... is roughly analogous to C++'s constructors, if you don't count C++'s
> > implicit passing of the object.
>
> One important difference is that Python gives more control over the
> construction process.  For example, in C++ the constructors of all base
> classes are always called before the constructor body is entered.  A
Python
> '__init__' method can choose if, when, and in what order the base class
> '__init__' methods should be called.

...so Python's constructors are closer to Java, where superclass
construction is also non-implicit (Java has single inheritance,
and therefore the handy 'super' keyword, but it seems to me that
the implicit vs explicit distinction is more important here).


Alex