Guido van Rossum wrote:
> OK, so how's this for a radical proposal.
>
> Let's change the property built-in so that its arguments can be either
> functions or strings (or None). If they are functions or None, it
> behaves exactly like it always has.
>
> If an argument is a string, it should be a method name, and the method
> is looked up by that name each time the property is used. Because this
> is late binding, it can be put before the method definitions, and a
> subclass can override the methods. Example:
>
> class C:
>
> foo = property('getFoo', 'setFoo', None, 'the foo property')
>
> def getFoo(self):
> return self._foo
>
> def setFoo(self, foo):
> self._foo = foo
>
> What do you think?
+1 from here.
> If you can think of a solution that looks better than mine, you're a genius.
letting "class" inject a slightly magic "self" variable into the class
namespace ?
class C:
foo = property(self.getFoo, self.setFoo, None, 'the foo property')
def getFoo(self):
return self._foo
def setFoo(self, foo):
self._foo = foo
(figuring out exactly what "self" should be is left as an exercise etc)
</F>
_______________________________________________
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
