Hi list, Hi Nick, Sorry for my delayed response, it is summer here...
> However, phrasing it that way suggest that it's possible we *did* miss > something in the PEP: we haven't specified whether or not __set_name__ > should be called when someone does someone does "cls.attr = descr". > Given the name, I think we *should* call it in that case, and then the > semantics during class creation are approximately what would happen if > we actually built up the class attributes as: > > for attr, value in cls_ns.items(): > setattr(cls, attr, value) That's a very good point and actually easy to solve: we would just need to override type.__setattr__ to do so. Actually, it is already overridden, so we just need to add code to type.__setattr__ to also call __set_name__. One could be of the other standpoint that in your above example it's the duty of the caller of setattr to also call __set_name__. It would be pretty easy to add a line in the loop that also calls __set_owner__. Greetings Martin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
