In article <m2vdluxt0j....@cs.uu.nl>, Piet van Oostrum <p...@cs.uu.nl> wrote: >>>>>> a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) (A) wrote: > >>A> In article <m27hybyo95....@cs.uu.nl>, Piet van Oostrum <p...@cs.uu.nl> >>wrote: >>>>>>>>> a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) (A) wrote: >>>> >>A> In article <m24otg3hkk....@cs.uu.nl>, Piet van Oostrum >>A> <p...@cs.uu.nl> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> And to get c.x = 4 working you also need a __setitem__. >>>> >>A> Nope. You do need __setitem__ so that this works: >>>> >>A> c['x'] = 4 >>>> >>>> Sorry, I meant such that c.x = 4 does the same as c['x'] = 4 because >>>> that was what the OP wanted (I think). > >>A> c.x = 4 >>A> already updates the instance dict, so there's no need to change any class >>A> methods to support it. That is, IME it's much better to add methods to >>A> a regular class to make it more dict-like using the built-in instance >>A> dict rather than changing any of the attribute mechanisms. If you're >>A> really curious, I recommend trying several approaches yourself to see >>A> what works better. ;-) > >Yes, that's why I mentioned __setitem__. I just mixed up the motivation.
Gotcha. Unfortunately, I can only respond to what you've written, not what you intended to write. ;-) (There was enough misinformation earlier in this thread that I felt being really really clear was important.) -- Aahz (a...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." --Red Adair -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
