Dustan wrote: > Looking at this interactive session: > > >>> class A(object): > def __init__(self, a): > self.a = a > def get_a(self): return self.__a > def set_a(self, new_a): self.__a = new_a > a = property(get_a, set_a) > > > >>> class B(A): > b = property(get_a, set_a) > > > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "<pyshell#11>", line 1, in <module> > class B(A): > File "<pyshell#11>", line 2, in B > b = property(get_a, set_a) > NameError: name 'get_a' is not defined > >>> class B(A): > b = a > > > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "<pyshell#13>", line 1, in <module> > class B(A): > File "<pyshell#13>", line 2, in B > b = a > NameError: name 'a' is not defined > >>> > > B isn't recognizing its inheritence of A's methods get_a and set_a > during creation. > > Why am I doing this? For an object of type B, it makes more sense to > reference the attribute 'b' than it does to reference the attribute > 'a', even though they are the same, in terms of readability.
Clarification: The code given is obviously not the actual code. I doubt it would really make a difference in types A and B given here, but for what I'm actually doing, it makes a big difference. > Is there any way to make this work as intended? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
