> > Does this mean that __setattr__ > > incurs the same performance penalty that overriding __getattribute__ > > would? > > Not quite AFAICT - there's less going on here. Also, getting an > attribute is (usually at least) more common than setting it. > > > Possibly I can live with this because I think that most of what > > I'm doing is getting attributes, or modifying mutable ones, rather > > than setting them. > > Well... Using the __setattr__/__getattr__ hooks is IMHO the simplest > solution that can possibly work - far simpler than your previous one at > least. As far as I'm concerned, and unless some other point of your > specs make this unusable or unpractical, I'd go for this solution first > and run a couple benchs on real-life-or-close-to conditions to check if > the performance hit is acceptable.
I think you're right - I've just tried implementing a simple version of this in my code and it seems that in the time critical parts of it __setattr__ isn't called even once. So I think I'll go with this solution (after having run a few tests). Thanks for your suggestion! -- Dan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
