Agreed the __pre_init__ idea is no improvement. I think we're back where
you started -- just use `object.__setattr__` to set the attribute in
`__post_init__`. That's what the PEP says is used by the generated
`__init__`, so I think it is reasonable to copy that pattern. Presumably
the situation doe
>
> Why can'y you make `name` on `NamedObjectItem` a property that returns `
> self.obj.name`? Why store a duplicate copy of the name?
>
Agreed, it's probably a better design not to store a duplicate reference to
name. But when I tried that, the property clashed with the inherited field.
This caus
Hi, I have been working on a new way to use Python classes as enhanced dict
object(I called it Prodict).
My solution is (IMHO) more concise and brings more features.
So I wanted to make it a PEP until I saw PEP 557 Data Classes.
With my proposed enhancement, I can do everything Data Classes can do
Why can'y you make `name` on `NamedObjectItem` a property that returns `
self.obj.name`? Why store a duplicate copy of the name?
PS. I have to ponder why frozen dataclasses don't use `__new__`.
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:43 PM, Ben Lewis wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Guido van Rossu
On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 6:40 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>
> That's a pretty tricky proposal, and one that's been debated on and off
> for a long time in other contexts. And that flag would somehow have to be
> part of every instance's state.
>
> In general the right way to initialize an immuta
