In article <mailman.461.1378072496.19984.python-l...@python.org>, Tim Delaney <timothy.c.dela...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 September 2013 06:33, Ethan Furman <et...@stoneleaf.us> wrote: > > > > > class PlainPython: > > > > value = None > > > > > > In the Javaesque class we see the unPythonic way of using getters/setters; > > in the ProtectedPython* class we see the pythonic way of providing > > getters/setters**; in the PlainPython class we have the standard, > > unprotected, direct access to the class attribute. > > > > No where in PlainPython is a getter/setter defined, nor does Python define > > one for us behind our backs. > > > > If you have evidence to the contrary I'd like to see it. > > > > I think Roy is referring to the fact that attribute access is implemented > via __getattr__ / __getattribute__ / __setattr__ / __delattr__. From one > point of view, he's absolutely correct - nearly all attributes are accessed > via getters/setters in Python. > > Tim Delaney Thank you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list