On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 09:01:27 -0800, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Josiah Carlson wrote: > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > I think properties are the most used case where this kind of thing would > > > be nice. Though the only thing that I've ever had a gripe with > > > properties is that I didn't like the trailing property() call - which is > > > why I wrote a property helper decorator (a use can be seen in [1]). But > > > my needs are small, so maybe this kind of thing isn't sufficient for > > > those who write hundreds of properties. > > [snip] > > > > I'm still trying to decide if the following is an elegant solution to > > defining > > properties, or a horrible abuse of function decorators: > > [snip example] > > The only issue is that you are left with a closure afterwards, no big > deal, unless you've got hundreds of thousands of examples of this. I > like your method anyways.
No closed over variables, actually. So no closure. > > - Josiah > Jp _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
