So subclass B has no access to __not_here in A after all...
OK, in one of legacy Python I supported there are a lot of code floating
around like this. It works OK (in term of business logic and unit test).
That's probably due to luck :-)
It also uses a lot of __slot__ = ['attr_a', 'attr_b'...] in
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Anthony Kong
wrote:
> Awesome, Thomas. The trick only works if there is only one leading
> underscore in the method names.
> The following example works as I expected for the derived class B.
> class A(object):
> def __init__(self):
> self.__not_here =
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Anthony Kong
wrote:
> Thanks again for your input, Thomas.
> I normally prefer
> not_here = property(lambda self: self.__get_not_here(), lambda self, v:
> self.__set_not_here(v))
> than
> not_here = property(__get_not_here, __set_not_here)
> Because it allows me t
On 2:59 PM, Anthony Kong wrote:
> So the question: is it possible to use lambda expression at all for
> the setter? (As in the last, commented-out line)
>
> Python interpreter will throw an exception right there if I use the
> last line ('SyntaxError: lambda cannot contain assignment'). I'd use
>
>
> PS: are you sure the lambda self: self.__foo() trick works, with
> subclasses or otherwise? I haven't tested it, and I'm not saying it
> doesn't, but I have a feeling double-underscore name mangling might be a
> problem somewhere down the line?
>
>
Awesome, Thomas. The trick only works if there
# On 07/11/2011 06:53 PM, Anthony Kong wrote:
# But decorator! Of course! Thanks for reminding me this.
#
# In your example, where does '@not_here' come from? (Sorry, this syntax
# is new to me)
class A(object):
def __init__(self):
self.not_here = 1
@property
def not_here(se
Good point! Need to get my terminology right. Thanks
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Anthony Kong
> wrote:
> > Hi, all,
> > This question is in the same context of my two earlier questions. This
> > question was raised by some python beginner
Thanks again for your input, Thomas.
I normally prefer
not_here = property(lambda self: self.__get_not_here(), lambda self, v:
self.__set_not_here(v))
than
not_here = property(__get_not_here, __set_not_here)
Because it allows me to have a pair getter/setter (when there is a need for
it). Use o
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Anthony Kong wrote:
> Hi, all,
> This question is in the same context of my two earlier questions. This
> question was raised by some python beginners, and I would like to check with
> the list to ensure I provide a correct answer.
> Here is a code snippet I used t
On 07/11/2011 05:54 PM, Anthony Kong wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> This question is in the same context of my two earlier questions. This
> question was raised by some python beginners, and I would like to check
> with the list to ensure I provide a correct answer.
>
> Here is a code snippet I used to de
Hi, all,
This question is in the same context of my two earlier questions. This
question was raised by some python beginners, and I would like to check with
the list to ensure I provide a correct answer.
Here is a code snippet I used to demonstrate the keyword *property*:
class A(object):
11 matches
Mail list logo
