On 10/16/05, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/16/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nick, and everybody else trying to find a "solution" for this > > "problem", please don't. There's nothing wrong with having the three > > accessor methods explicitly in the namespace, it's clear, and probably > > less typing (and certainly less indenting!). Just write this: > > > > class C: > > def getFoo(self): ... > > def setFoo(self): ... > > foo = property(getFoo, setFoo) > > Does this necessisarily mean a 'no' still for class decorators, or do > you just not like this particular use case for them. Or, are you > perhaps against this proposal due to its use of nested classes?
I'm still -0 on class decorators pending good use cases. I'm -1 on using a class decorator (if we were to introduce them) for get/set properties; it doesn't save writing and it doesn't save reading. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ 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
