On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:23 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> BTW, +1 on this. I like Fred's suggestion of property.set().
Thanks! Of all the proposals that have been presented, I still like
that the best.
Guido's use case of wanting to give the r/w property a different name
than the r/o property is a good one, though I've not run across it
myself. I'd be satisfied with passing in the origin property, though
I'd want to be able to do that for the get method as well as the set
and delete methods. That would better support being able to extend a
property in a derived class.
For example:
class Base(object):
@property
def attribute(self):
return 42
class Derived(Base):
@property.get(Base.__dict__["attribute"])
def attribute(self):
self.do_something()
return super(Derived, self).attribute
What I don't like is the difficulty of getting the raw descriptor
from the base class. It would be good to be able to say:
class Derived(Base):
@property.get(Base.attribute)
def attribute(self):
self.do_something()
return super(Derived, self).attribute
I doubt that's all that hard to achieve, at least for a known
property type. To support descriptors of completely different types,
the syntax from the first example may be required unless some other
crutch is added.
-Fred
--
Fred Drake <fdrake at acm.org>
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
