Hello again,
I just tried with the classmethod() built_in function. Well, this is
exactly what I was looking for. It supplies a way of defining type_level
methods -- what was missing before.
[I still think this is a workaround: we would not need this if the
syntax was the same for methods and properties, or what?]
It makes the job: below an simulation example related to the previously
exposed case.
class Config(object):
pass
config = Config()
class Format(object):
@classmethod # with so-called "decorator"
def config(Format):
Format.a = config.format_a
#config = classmethod(config) # with built_in function
def build_config():
# (re)read config data from file
# e.g. value for format 'n' parameter in file
config.format_a = 1
# let the symbol types (re) import their proper config
# e.g. Format
Format.config() # no error!
build_config()
print Format.a # 1!
Well, would someone clarify the point about decorators? Rather the point
of having both a built-in function (introduced in python 2.2, as I just
read) and a "decorator" (2.4) for a single use of declaring a method
not_to_be_bound_to_an_instance? I'm rather sure there's more behind... I
noticed that more and more features expressed with built-in functions
get alternative syntax.
Denis
_______________________________________________
Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
